We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Regression Testing Tools with 89 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 6th in Regression Testing Tools with 70 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, UiPath Test Suite and Ranorex Studio, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, froglogic Squish and Eggplant Test. See our OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.