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

AutonomIQ TestIQ vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

AutonomIQ TestIQ
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
37th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of AutonomIQ TestIQ is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 8.5%, up from 8.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.5%
AutonomIQ TestIQ0.6%
Other90.9%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VS
Test Associate & Manager at IGT Solutions
A low-code and no-code tool for automation purposes that is very user-friendly
AutonomIQ TestIQ is only available on mobile devices and on the web. I wish to see AutonomIQ TestIQ in a different area, like game automation or game testing. There is no tool or support offered in the market for game testing. The automatic automation should help capture videos, logs, audio, and other steps with which the user plays that particular game if I want to automate any graphical game with the help of a low-code and no-code tool, like AutonomIQ TestIQ. The ability to capture and record with the help of automation is not there in AutonomIQ TestIQ. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.
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

"UI is one of the best features of AutonomIQ TestIQ."
"The fact that it works with a vast number of technologies works for us because our internal customers use the tool for testing a lot of different applications."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"We are a worldwide organization with a complex financial authorization matrix and when changes were made to this matrix, we provided automated test scripts and more than 20,000 tests were executed in 1 week."
"Micro Focus UFT is a good product in my opinion; I can say it's a stable system and it's a legacy, and we have been using it for a long time."
"There is a lot of flexibility and functionality in UFT."
"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."
"It helps us consolidate our efforts."
"We have performed 3500 test case automations, and we are able to execute them in just five days, whereas if we were to do this manually, it would take 30 days."
 

Cons

"The ability to capture and record with the help of automation is not there in AutonomIQ TestIQ."
"The amount of space it utilizes on the client side is quite excessive."
"We have to download it, then install it on our own machines and the machines sometimes aren't stable; since we have PDIs, also the UFT isn't stable and I don't know yet where the connection is."
"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."
"The scalability is good, although it’s not without its problems."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"It's an expensive solution."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"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."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
 

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

No data available
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.