

OpenText Functional Testing and BlazeMeter compete in the software testing category. BlazeMeter seems to have the upper hand due to its cloud-based load testing capability, which offers global scalability and efficient resource usage.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing supports various operating systems and browsers. It offers InsightObject.ClickSpecial for object recognition and 64-bit COM object references. BlazeMeter focuses on cloud-based load testing, offers scalability, and integrates with open-source tools like JMeter, simulating real-world traffic conditions with performance monitoring.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing suffers from high resource consumption and limited browser compatibility, with calls for better .NET application support and non-HP software integration. BlazeMeter could improve in test execution feedback, server load handling, detailed custom report generation, and better Selenium integration for script management.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing is deployed on-premises, requiring significant infrastructure. While it integrates well with enterprise systems, deployment can be slow. Customer support varies with package level and can be slow. BlazeMeter’s cloud-based nature offers easy deployment and scalability. It is praised for rapid support and user-friendly interface, enhancing customer experience.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is expensive with high upfront costs and complex licensing, but offers good ROI through increased testing productivity. BlazeMeter's flexible pricing model suits startups and enterprises, providing scalable testing and good ROI by optimizing resources with global cloud capabilities.
BlazeMeter has positively affected my ROI, significantly saving time, resources, and money.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
Customer support for BlazeMeter is commendable, offering 24/7 assistance.
The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
BlazeMeter has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.
BlazeMeter is quite scalable, and I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.
Running them in parallel allows you to consume multiple runtime licenses and just execute the tests that don't have conflicting priorities and get through a lot of volume much quicker.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
BlazeMeter is incredibly stable and delivers accurate results consistently.
I would rate the stability of BlazeMeter as eight out of ten, indicating that it is a stable and reliable solution.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
If BlazeMeter could automate integration across multiple pipelines and fetch the latest builds automatically, it would significantly enhance my experience.
The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.
The extra CSV random dataset plugin could be integrated with a simple checkbox in the existing CSV dataset plugin to read files randomly.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Regarding pricing, it is favorable compared to other tools, providing good value.
BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter.
Unlike JMeter, which has limitations on user simulations, BlazeMeter allows me to test any number of users, helping my e-commerce website manage unpredictable traffic loads effectively while delivering accurate results I can trust to improve my systems.
BlazeMeter integrates with JMeter via multiple plugins, which streamlines performance testing, test monitoring, and report sharing.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText Functional Testing has an impressive ability to connect to mobile devices and its ability to test so many different types of software, whether it be mainframe, APIs, mobile, web, or desktop.
The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 7.1% |
| BlazeMeter | 1.2% |
| Other | 91.7% |

| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 18 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 9 |
| Large Enterprise | 23 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 71 |
BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.
The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.
OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.
OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.
We monitor all Functional 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.