Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (6th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (3rd)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.9%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers2.9%
Digital.ai Continuous Testing0.9%
Other96.2%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Alan Chiou - PeerSpot reviewer
PM at Galaxy Software Services
Has Mobile Studio feature which can generate scripts
The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version.
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 most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."
"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."
"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
 

Cons

"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."
"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."
"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."
"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."
"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."
"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"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."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"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."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
12%
Insurance Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.
What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I...
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
I'm using Digital.ai Continuous Testing to create and test a mobile application. We're developing and testing a mobile app.
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?
There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
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...
 

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest
Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.