No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Appvance AIQ Platform vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Appvance AIQ Platform
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
34th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
15th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (54th), Performance Testing Tools (17th), Load Testing Tools (20th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (6th)
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Appvance AIQ Platform is 1.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 6.8%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.8%
Appvance AIQ Platform1.1%
Other92.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user129477 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Tester/QA at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Network Emulation allows for performance testing of geographically-distributed users.
It is a great performance testing tool. The most valuable feature of the tool is its Avatar technology. Scripting is really fast, compared to other tools. It works for almost all major protocols, platforms and browsers. It makes complex scenarios simple, and we need minimal custom coding. It also provides features for Network Emulation, which is quite helpful in testing the performance for geographically-distributed users. Appvance can provide information from end to end (back-end and front-end), which makes it surpass other tools. The tool provides protocol level as well as browser level response time. And it can be integrated with major monitoring tools. As it is a web-based tool, it makes it easy to access anywhere anytime. All the team members can access the common information easily.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is a great performance testing tool."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"I was able to reduce regression and functional test times by 80%."
"The return on investment for any company buying this product license is 100 percent, as businesses with clients increase productivity when manual tasks becomes faster and efficient by automating them with this tool."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"When compared with UFT and manual execution, we have definitely saved a lot of effort, somewhere in the range of 60 to 70 percent when compared with our efforts to manually test."
 

Cons

"Reporting features can be improved to provide more flexibility, collation, exporting in different formats, etc."
"The solution is expensive."
"It looks like User Acceptance Testing of the product is getting bypassed entirely because this design has precedence in UFT."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"It often crashes."
"Yes, there were stability issues sometimes."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"It's hard to install the license seat because the web-based GUI is not user friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"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."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The tool's price is high."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Computer Software Company
13%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
7%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
 

Also Known As

Appvance
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Bell Canada, CBS, UBC, PepsiCo, 7-11, BenefitVision, Kabbage, Catalent Pharmaceuticals, McKesson, Veritas, Cherwell, QAT Global, Sony, SiriusXM, CoPart, Auto Parts Alliance, PPD
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.