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

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st)
OpenText Functional Testing
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), Test Automation Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Broadcom Service Virtualization is designed for Service Virtualization and holds a mindshare of 25.7%, down 26.3% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 8.7% mindshare, up 8.3% since last year.
Service Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization25.7%
Parasoft Virtualize22.8%
OpenText Service Virtualization17.2%
Other34.3%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.7%
Tricentis Tosca9.2%
SmartBear TestComplete4.4%
Other77.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
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

"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"The features are really good in the middleware testing world; it supports lots of technologies and I would strongly recommend this tool for automation and virtualization."
"It provides us a high level of integration with all of our solutions, to the extent that we can set up modules with Service Virtualization functionality at the same time."
"The benefits are cost savings on hardware and earlier defect identification."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"Over about a year, we have saved over half a million for our customer."
"It gives us the ability to simulate and virtualize components that we don’t currently have."
"The tool always had some additional features included in each of its releases and it fixed the bugs of the previous release."
"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"This tool is awesome for automation even though it is expensive."
"The fact that UFT One covers multiple technologies helps in terms of end-to-end scenarios."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"My company is very firefighting friendly, so the ROI was immense when it came to automation and the amount of time it took to get test suites and regression set up."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications, and it is very productive in terms of execution."
 

Cons

"ROI is NOT that great since the product license is expensive."
"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"CA SV takes up lot of your system resources."
"UI testing needs improvements."
"It’s a good product, but comes with a hefty cost. If there is a better licensing/cost negotiation, then it can work, otherwise it’s not a viable solution."
"Usability in the prior version that we used, version 8.2, usability is not great."
"Sometimes we need to develop in web services custom behaviors that simulate technically and functionally the real service."
"The one main thing we want to see is more on the reporting side."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"HP products sometimes have a lot of bugs to fix. You get in trouble sometimes because you want to adhere to some timelines, but then you find that the solution doesn't work."
"Cost is one area where there is room for improvement."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The price is reasonable."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
25%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
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

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, 
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Tricentis, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.