We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"The solution is scalable."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 30 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Katalon Studio. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
