We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and Perfecto based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"There are a whole bunch of things that I like about the solution, but I really love the interaction it has with mobile devices, the testing capabilities, as well as reporting capabilities that we get from the application. The reports are very detailed."
"The automated test reporting functionality is the most valuable feature. We use the CI Dashboard. It's very important as it is the main reporting tool for our automated tests."
"Perfecto has affected our software quality in a good way. It has allowed us to execute on-demand and on-choice. We also track the number of issues that we find in the product. Every single day, we tag the issues that we found. For example, if something was found by automation, that means it was found by a Perfecto execution. Over time, we realized the real value in tracking those numbers. We can see now that we have clearly been finding issues earlier. It has allowed us to catch our defects earlier, thus improving the quality of our applications."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is that it covers all types of devices on the market allowing you to test different versions of an operating system."
"The most valuable feature is automated testing."
"One of the good things about Perfecto is the scalability that it provides."
"We're working in Agile and we need results ASAP. The fact that the lab provides same-day access to new devices is extremely important to us."
"In terms of cross-platform testing, they offer all of it, every device available in the market. It covers real scenarios that mimic production so that we don't miss out on any devices that our clients might be using to run the applications we develop. It's been great and very helpful."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"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."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"I would like to see the inclusion of machine learning features. If we can have that, it will be a better tool."
"I'm hoping that Perfecto will come up with browser testing as well because it would be easier to access it."
"There was a discussion about having the capability to export the test results to a certain tool that we use in our project. If that were added it would be great not having to manually take screenshots, put them in a document, and share them on the different test management tools."
"Its performance should be improved. Anything to speed up the user interface would be a great help. We've had a lot of pain with their migration from a product UI that was based on Adobe Flash to the new product that is based on HTML5. Migrations like that seemed to be very painful and not a real smooth process. We're still sort of recovering from that migration from old technology to new, and we haven't got all the functionality ported over that we used to have on the old UI."
"We've had a couple of issues lately with videos not loading or browsers dying after some execution, although that happens very rarely."
"It does well for mobile testing, but when it comes to the web aspect, it is lagging a little bit in terms of execution."
"We have had some issues with performance, which is something that should be improved."
"It would be ideal if there was a complete integration with other test management tools and other applications like HPLM, Micro Focus, or Microsoft Azure."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Perfecto is ranked 3rd in Functional Testing Tools with 23 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Perfecto is rated 8.4. 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 Perfecto writes "Its reporting allows us to have a clear view regarding what tests have been executed". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas Perfecto is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Appium, AWS Device Farm and Katalon Studio. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Perfecto report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing 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.
