IBM Rational Test Workbench vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the API Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #16, while OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.8% mindshare in APIT, compared to OpenText’s 11.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Test Workbench

Read 4 IBM Rational Test Workbench reviews

459 Views
211 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 97 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,409 Views
4,036 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Test Workbench

OpenText Functional Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and IBM Rational Test Workbench compete in the automated testing market. IBM Rational Test Workbench holds an edge in features, while OpenText leads in pricing and support, appealing to budget-conscious buyers.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing offers scriptless test creation, comprehensive automation options, and simplified execution. IBM Rational Test Workbench provides robust integrations, scalability for complex environments, and focuses on collaboration and defect management.

Room for Improvement: OpenText needs enhancement in integrations and complex environment scalability, and should offer better collaboration tools. IBM Rational Test Workbench could simplify setup, offer more intuitive user interfaces, and lower its initial costs for broader appeal.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText provides a straightforward deployment process and responsive support, making it user-friendly. IBM Rational Test Workbench has a more complex deployment but benefits from a comprehensive support network and resources, suited for large-scale environments.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing offers a lower initial cost and attractive ROI for smaller setups. IBM Rational Test Workbench requires higher initial investment but gives considerable value in comprehensive solutions, justifying the cost for organizations needing extensive test automation.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,164 peers since 2012

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

IBM Rational Test Workbench

Ranking in API Testing Tools

16th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

37th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (20th)

OpenText Functional Testing

Ranking in API Testing Tools

6th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the API Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 11.7%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

API Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Good integration with other tools, stable, scales easily

There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation. This includes the workbench as well as the other tools. In the future, I would like to see the other types of tests supported, that are not already covered in the DevOps approach. This would include, for example, penetration testing.

Read full review

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development

I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."

"It is a stable solution."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."

"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."

"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."

"The most valuable features are its support for multiple technologies, ease of coding, object repository, and ability to design our own framework. The recording playback feature allows those unfamiliar with coding to use the tool."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

Cons

"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."

"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."

"Previously, the product was a script-based solution. Presently, the tool offers non-script, no-code, or low-code functionalities, making it an area where improvements are required."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"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."

"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."

"UFT still requires some coding."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."

"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"The price is reasonable."

"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The tool's price is high."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

30%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Non Profit

Government

Manufacturing Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?

My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

Areas of OpenText Functional Testing that have room for improvement include having an option to store objects in the public repository when using Object Spy and adding objects, as it currently stor...

See all answers

Comparisons

Postman Enterprise vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 22% of the time

Perfecto vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 17% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 15% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 13% of the time

More IBM Rational Test Workbench Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 26% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 12% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

August 2025

Download IBM Rational Test Workbench product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

August 2025

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

Overview

IBM Rational Test Workbench provides a comprehensive test automation solution for mobile applications, regression testing, integration technologies and performance and scalability testing. It helps you build intelligent and interconnected enterprise applications that can be deployed on traditional and cloud infrastructures. With Rational Test Workbench, you can significantly reduce test cycle times, moving integration testing earlier in the development lifecycle.

IBM

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?

Multiplatform Compatibility: Works seamlessly across technologies, browsers, and platforms.
Automation Span: Provides automation for APIs, GUIs, SAP, and Oracle applications.
Intuitive Design: Object identification and recording simplify usage for all coding levels.
Integration Capabilities: Interfaces with tools like Jenkins and ALM for streamlined testing.
Built-in Frameworks: Offers frameworks like BPT for accelerated test development.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Reduced Manual Testing: Minimizes the effort required for manual testing tasks.
Time Efficiency: Accelerates testing processes with user-friendly features.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with CI/CD tools, enhancing operational productivity.
Comprehensive Coverage: Automates test cases involving multiple scenarios effectively.

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.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing

July 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing report.

See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all API 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.