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

Bitbar vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

 

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

Bitbar
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Platforms (9th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.3%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.3%
Bitbar1.5%
Other95.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1288116 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Digital & Cognitive Services at a tech company with 11-50 employees
A testing platform with a good API for apps, but pricing is complicated
I like that the AI Testbot is a near-zero code application for testing. For this use case, the function is good. The services are robust. Game testing and the API for apps are also good. From the perspective of pricing, licensing, ease of use, integration with other applications, impact complexity, and integration with other tools, we're pretty much very satisfied.
Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.
User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The overall product is awesome for device fragmentation, but not for automation."
"The feature that I like the most is that you can use different frameworks, whether it's APM or something else, and you don't need to worry about the framework."
"Game testing and the API for apps are good."
"From the perspective of pricing, licensing, ease of use, integration with other applications, impact complexity, and integration with other tools, we're pretty much very satisfied."
"Ability to use different frameworks."
"LeanFT integrates with our developers work-flow, so our developers can now perform automation using familiar tools, programming language, and IDE, which helps get the whole team involved in test automation."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"And I think all these parts together make it the best possible solution."
"Within a week, two of my global customers were able to leverage their automation through this solution, and the adaptability of how this slotted in was just amazing, which was incredibly efficient."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"The Java and .NET programmers have said that "This tool is really good; we don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play, and it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us.""
"We pretty much use that to streamline workflow and enable productivity in a business context in our business unit as well as in our IT shop, so just reducing workload on IT people as well as testing."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
 

Cons

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."
"Improvement of the product could be made by running the dashboard part, it gets stuck sometimes."
"Some stages of its automation is not working correctly and I need to make changes in the code created by Testdroid."
"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"Because of all the problems and limitations of the UTF product, I would rate it at only a four out of ten (where ten is the best and one is the worst)."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"Since it was a slightly different way of doing things, it was a little complex."
"The issue with all the integration is that it can become very costly and expensive and we'd like to be able to recommend one single tool that will do it all."
"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills."
"There are still some stability issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
 

Also Known As

Testdroid
Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.