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

CrossBrowserTesting vs OpenText Business Processing Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
35th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CrossBrowserTesting1.3%
OpenText Business Processing Testing1.0%
Other97.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
RR
Consultant at Infrasoft Technologies
Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases
There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, the product does what we need and does it well."
"It helps to speed up the process to test the product in different devices and browsers, making it easy to troubleshoot some issues."
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."
"We no longer need to have a full QA team, testing is more quickly and reliably reproduced, and scheduled daily tests assist in catching any bugs which fall through the cracks and make it to the production environment."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"The technical support is good."
"Overall, this solution has proved useful to our organization, and with future improvements and the hopeful addition of devices, it will continue to be a tool we use daily."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"ROI is pretty good as the approach of framework allows virtually everyone to take part in designing test cases."
"We can now take test automation through the entire business process -- testing web service availability before automated test packs start, sending and retrieving data via web-services and control of all web service testing in a single tool, along with the GUI testing of business processes across a multitude of platforms from java web through to AS400 green screen terminal apps."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that even a nontechnical tester, like a functional tester or a business analyst, can use it once the components are ready."
"This solution is very helpful to me, and I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"Because everyone can create test cases, not only the quantity but also the quality is improved, which results in less defects in production."
"The big difference with BPT over conventional frameworks with which I have worked is that BPT allows me to separate test development from automation development."
"The BPT framework is very modular."
 

Cons

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"Automated testing could be improved."
"I had some problems with the local connection, but there is someone that can help us always on customer support chat."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool."
"Test execution speed has been my biggest concern."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"Initial releases we used of the product (v12) were a little unstable, but with the release of v12.01, we had no further issues."
"To be honest, technical support is not that great."
"Technical support lacks efficiency and all they do is to move in circles by opening new tickets and all the related stuffs without any intention of solving the real problem."
"The only one I can really think of is speed to test execution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Construction Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Migros Bank AG
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.