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

LEAPWORK vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 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

LEAPWORK
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of LEAPWORK is 1.5%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 9.2%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Blaine Anderson - PeerSpot reviewer
Flow automation software that is user friendly for non technical teams and offers good value for money
If it is a business critical environment that needs to be up 99.999% of the time, LEAPWORK is the solution to go with because the ROI on it is good. We ended up using SmartBear because of how expensive LEAPWORK is. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
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 UI is user-friendly."
"It provides automated testing. Instead of us doing manual testing, we can utilize Leapwork, and it tests most of our critical processes. In the next phase, we also plan to do some process work with it, such as using Leapwork to create reports or provide certain extracts of data."
"The most valuable of this solution is the no code option. It offers drag and drop when it comes to development and removes the need for a developer."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy and straightforward."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
 

Cons

"It is a very comprehensive tool, and there is a significant learning curve to being able to adopt the tool. Because it does so much, there is only so much that you can learn. You can, however, do some simpler things right away. They do have a kind of boot camp where some of their experts engage with you, and during that time, you can work on the top initiatives that you want to do, and that's a good process. After you start using the tool, there is a lot more that you would want to do."
"The only thing that I don't like about the product is the need to deploy agents on the laptops of people doing the testing. So, you have an agent on a server, then you have an agent on the laptop of the person who is doing the testing, and that seems like a lot of stuff and a kind of anti-cloud. Why do I have to deploy agents on people's machines in order to do something in the cloud? I'm sure they're doing that so they can monitor their licensing and all that stuff, but it is not necessarily a friendly process."
"The initial setup is difficult."
"This solution could be improved by offering better reporting related to the integration into Azure DevOps."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is not cheap."
"We got a deal on it for the first year. We're paying $8,000."
"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.""
"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."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"The price is reasonable."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Leapwork? How is Leapwork pricing?
Do you recommend Leapwork? I absolutely recommend Leapwork. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best test automation tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I fin...
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

Samutec
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about LEAPWORK vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.