OpenText UFT One Pricing

Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

When considering UFT for your organization, I would first evaluate how large your QA department is and if you will have a business need to automate your functional and regression tests. HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period. If your IT Organization can afford it, I would encourage the company to buy both ALM/Quality Center and UFT. The reason being that UFT is very compatible with ALM/Quality Center in several ways. First, the user is able to store the test results in ALM/Quality Center. Second, ALM/QC has a built in scheduler that can launch a suite of regression tests initiated by the user scheduling a particular date/time to run.

If your company is going to invest in UFT, I would encourage the company to do their due diligence in making sure that they hire an Automation Engineer well experienced with the HP tools. This person must be very good at writing VBScript and knowing all of the advanced tips and tricks in getting UFT scripts developed so they will run without stopping unexpectedly. The QA Automation Engineer must be able to write functions from scratch and know the difference between passing a parameter by Value and by Reference.

I would also encourage the company to use a Citrix Server for UFT to be installed on. The reason for this is that it is much easier to maintain the Citrix environment with respect to patches, Browser versions, etc., versus every user having to make sure their laptop or PC is up to date with patches. Also, Citrix can have multiple sessions and be accessed remotely.

View full review »
CT
Test Automaton Architect at Independent Health

It could be cheaper. I feel like it is a little expensive, but I never honestly understood the enterprise software space. For example, with Camtasia, if you look at the price of that, and you're like, "That just seems expensive. Why is it so expensive?" As an end-user, you feel like it could be cheaper. I would love to see them do some things to make it a bit more affordable. We have shifted around our licensing techniques because of the price. We started off with all concurrent users, but that was nearly twice the price of a seat license. So, we just kept a couple of concurrent licenses. because we are only paying maintenance on it now and shift to seat licenses to try to save us money. We also shifted to a couple of run-time licenses. We have equal thirds: run-time, seat, and full concurrent licenses. This is because of the costs. 

I wish you could look at them and price out each individual technology, but I have a feeling it would end up being more costly then. It feels expensive, as it can be upwards of $3,200 a seat or license, depending on how you license it, which sounds expensive. You are getting a lot there. I would love to see if there's anything they can do to reduce the price. We bundle to save, and there is always the ability for them to add discounts. It is like going to the store, where they are like, "Hey, this is on sale." However, if you just didn't raise the price in the beginning, you wouldn't need to have it on sale. 

The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it."

I expected the AI to require an upfront extra cost in addition to the subscription, and it didn't. There was no cloud service required for it, so I didn't have to go through security hoops because it all runs local.

It has more than 10 technologies that it uses. If you are only using two of them, then why pay for all 10? I guess we have just gotten so used to it, e.g., with LoadRunner, you pay for the technologies that you are using. I would hate to see what the LoadRunner license would look like if it was the same structure as UFT One.

They are an enterprise product. I get that they are expensive. Somehow, I wish they could be cheaper. I don't know how they could do it. 

If I could pick on them for one thing, their licensed portal is just abysmal. It is so hard to use. So, the licenses come via three fashions: 

  1. You have a licensed server with concurrent licenses where I basically lease the license for the time that my program is open. That one is not too bad and works quite well. You pretty much do a one-time setup of the thing, then you pretty much forget that exists and just go. We have some of these licenses.
  2. We also have seat licenses. This is the one where once it's installed, then it's amazing. However, unless you have a partner that can get it for you, using the portal stinks for getting the actual license. It is a terrible experience. Sometimes, it doesn't even work. When it works, it's great but it could be so much more user-friendly to get the actual license. 
  3. You just call your partner or OpenText, then they literally mail you a file. That would be easy, but I'm slightly impatient. So, I want the license and I want it now, so I will go into the portal and get it. 

I usually can go into the portal, as long as it is working, but it's not always the most obvious thing to work with. I can see that they're making it better. It's just not best yet.

View full review »
Vinod-Parmar - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, Technical Services Owner at Insignia

The pricing of the product is an issue. The other product that my company is considering against OpenText UFT One is an equally bad solution. The aforementioned statement proves that pricing may not be a criterion when planning to purchase a solution, but our company needs to look into how much investment we have on the platform we use compared to other subsidiaries where some alternate products are used.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
MS
Senior Test Automation Consultant at PROSSE

Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive. For the coverage and accuracy that it provides, the product is good compared to other products. However, it is a difficult solution. The time spent learning the solution also costs the organization. I rate the pricing a seven or eight out of ten.

View full review »
Aurobindo Sahoo - PeerSpot reviewer
VP at Deloitte

We purchase the solution's yearly license. It costs 700k. There are no additional costs involved.

View full review »
TC
India CoE Leader at LyondellBasell

It's the best pricing compared to other tools on the market. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of affordability. 

View full review »
Robertino Catalin Ionescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Department Manager of Testing Automation Centre at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees

The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some.

View full review »
HT
Senior Consultant at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license.

It's a yearly subscription.

View full review »
Paul Grossman - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead QA Engineer at Guaranteed Rate

For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand.

While many will argue there are other tools available that are free, you may find it hard to find one which supports so many new and legacy web technologies, terminal emulators, and Windows thick client applications. It's the kitchen sink of tools with an easy to learn language, a solid history, and extensive support resources.

View full review »
SwathyBhavani - PeerSpot reviewer
Delivery manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

The client has a large number of licenses, which they obtained along with their SAP. The SAP licenses include Application LifeCycle Management. And this has been with our client for at least 12 to 15 years.

I believe it should be three and a half to four out of five. The price is reasonable. They are inexpensive.

View full review »
BM
Team Lead at T-Systems International GmbH

The pricing could definitely be lower. I don't know the prices by heart. I'm not the one who discussed this with Micro Focus. I've heard several times that this is really expensive and we also have problems exactly for that reason. For example, for a user interface test to Selenium. At least when the SUT, the system under test, is web-based. There's not only the buying price. It's also the maintenance price. 

View full review »
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at iLAB LLC.

UFT One's license is somewhere in the $5,000-a-year range.

View full review »
HT
Senior Consultant at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription.

View full review »
TA
Test Automation Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

If you use it all the time and for different use cases then it is a good price. If you only use it one time a day for half an hour then it is pricey.

View full review »
Michael Kalogerou - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Delivery Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees

The solution's price is reasonable compared to other vendors. I rate its pricing as a four.

View full review »
RF
Senior Test Manager at Allianz

The license model is quite complex. We have the normal basic license plus some support costs and other things so it depends on a lot of factors.

View full review »
SM
Associate Manager at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees

We have to pay for licenses. The licensing fee is paid on a yearly basis.

The price is one aspect that could be improved.

View full review »
it_user567828 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Leader with 1,001-5,000 employees

The licensing and pricing model is confusing.

View full review »
it_user357576 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Engineer at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees

Cost is the biggest issue with UFT. It is not cheap. However, when evaluating the full cost (not just the licensing), I believe UFT is actually a cheaper solution in the end. That being said, seat licenses that are tied to a specific machine (can be moved via support) run approximately $10,000 with tax and associated annual maintenance agreement. A concurrent license runs approximately 17K with tax and maintenance agreement.

From an ROI standpoint, you need to look at the automation effort in comparison to the manual work it would reduce, as well as increased code coverage and a consistent level of testing. In most cases, it will take 2-3 years before the automation suite is significant enough to start seeing its cost even out. Any organization contemplating automation should have that type of commitment to see the automation effort become successful.

View full review »
KK
Practice Head - Automation at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

The license is important. If the license is up and running when you open it, there won't be any issues.

Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very cheap. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so OpenText offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive.

View full review »
DG
Senior Staff Software Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

UFT One has some competition from open-source solutions, so the license cost needs to be reasonable, and the demo periods need to be longer. Earlier, the demo period was 90 days, but it has been reduced to 60. 

If we want to cover the market, we need to consider free users, and the demo should be extended for some customers, so they can try the solution and get used to it. Then we can ask them to purchase a license for use.

View full review »
VR
Team Lead at Accenture

This solution is quite costly and there is no free trial available. We purchased it from SAP because we got a cheaper price.

The subscription fees are paid annually.

View full review »
it_user377535 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. SDET (Framework Architect) at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

UFT offers a variety of licenses like seat licenses and concurrent licenses. If the automation team is small, say two to four, and fixed, node locked seat licenses would be preferable. Else, it is always advisable to go with concurrent licenses.

View full review »
it_user357477 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant | Contractor Manager at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

It's an expensive solution.

View full review »
it_user347685 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. QA Engineer at a retailer with 501-1,000 employees

HP UFT cost a lot and there are other free tools that can do the same and much more.

View full review »
it_user348159 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant I at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

I do not know the exact numbers my company paid for the licenses, but from what I heard on the grapevine, only seat licenses were bought when absolutely necessary and floating licenses were bought for everything else.

View full review »
DC
Owner at a consultancy with self employed

The licensing costs are quite high. 

The more you do automation, the more you spend on the license cost. Due to that, sometimes when there is a boom in spending, you will need to justify the extra cost.

View full review »
it_user378180 - PeerSpot reviewer
SAP Consultant at KCA Deutag

The license for this product is provided through our support contract with SAP. Any other product would incur additional license costs.

View full review »
it_user347655 - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant System Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

The cost of the HP UFT license is more.

View full review »
it_user343329 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Product Development Engineer with 5,001-10,000 employees

Once the license is purchased, this tool can be used for automating many applications, and can be used by any automation developer working in an organization that has purchased this licensed tool.

View full review »
it_user341058 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees

The license is expensive.

View full review »
it_user461790 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

Have a look at the HP UFT pricing model; it’s changed.

View full review »
it_user346101 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant with 51-200 employees

It's expensive, but it's worth the money.

View full review »
it_user443127 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.