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

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

OpenText Business Processing Testing and OpenText Functional Testing are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked #39, while OpenText Functional Testing is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.8. OpenText Business Processing Testing holds a 0.3% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText Functional Testing’s 8.5% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText Business Processing Testing users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText Functional Testing users who would recommend it.
OpenText Business Processin...
Read 7 OpenText Business Processing Testing reviews
  • 201 Views
  • 169 Comparison Views
83% willing to recommend
OpenText Functional Testing
Read 97 OpenText Functional Testing reviews
  • 8,018 Views
  • 5,773 Comparison Views
87% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and OpenText Business Processing Testing compete in the software testing category. OpenText Business Processing Testing is often favored for its comprehensive features that justify its investment, while OpenText Functional Testing is appreciated for its satisfactory pricing and support.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing supports automated testing across environments, has scripting capabilities, and enhances test coverage. OpenText Business Processing Testing integrates directly with business workflows, manages complex business processes, and offers a holistic approach to testing.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could improve by adding more advanced business integration capabilities, enhancing its process management features, and strengthening its workflow automation. OpenText Business Processing Testing, while comprehensive, may benefit from simplifying its deployment process, optimizing its user interface for easier navigation, and providing more out-of-the-box integration supports.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing offers a straightforward deployment model with readily available support services. OpenText Business Processing Testing has a more intricate deployment due to extensive process integrations but provides comprehensive customer service to assist with its complexity.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is cost-effective with a lower initial setup cost and quicker returns. OpenText Business Processing Testing requires a higher initial investment but offers significant ROI through process optimization capabilities over time.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing Report (Updated: September 2025).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing
September 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 868,759 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

OpenText Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
39th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
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), Test Automation Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.3%, up from 0.1% 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%
OpenText Business Processing Testing0.3%
Other91.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RR
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.
Read full review
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…
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 is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy and straightforward."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give OpenText UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
More OpenText Functional Testing pros
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"The solution is expensive."
"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."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
More OpenText Functional Testing cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The tool's price is high."
"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 one aspect that could be improved."
"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."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"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."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
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 Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise71
 

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

No data available
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing
Compared 25% of the time
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing Logo
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing
Compared 12% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing
Compared 8% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing
Compared 7% of the time
UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing Logo
UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing
Compared 5% of the time
More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing
September 2025
OpenText Business Processing Testing reportDownload OpenText Business Processing Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Functional Testing
September 2025
OpenText Functional Testing reportDownload OpenText Functional Testing product report
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

OpenText

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

Migros Bank AG
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing
September 2025
Free Report: OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.