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

LambdaTest vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.3%, up from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 8.5%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.5%
LambdaTest5.3%
Other86.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
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…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."
"Our test execution time was reduced to 16 mins from five hours when executed in parallel on multiple VMs. This has been extremely helpful!"
"The UI is pretty clean and easy to navigate, and we were able to figure it out very quickly."
"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"The primary feature that has significantly improved our test execution times is automation."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
 

Cons

"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"There is scope for improvement in service account usage, LDAP integration, and adapting new devices and features."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"We get logged out of the devices if there is some inactivity."
"You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"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."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"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."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."
"The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution."
"I used the product for free."
"This is an affordable product."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise71
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
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 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.
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.