No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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 Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (7th)
Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
25th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.3%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.3%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.5%
Other95.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important thing about LeanFT is that it gives us the opportunity to introduce developer testing."
"The stability is quite good and we haven't had any issues."
"This is a good solution and I recommend it."
"I would say the most valuable is that we can get people started off really quickly on solutions because we've been partners with HPE for a long time and it helps us tailor the product to our needs."
"We pretty much use that to streamline workflow and enable productivity in a business context in our business unit as well as in our IT shop, so just reducing workload on IT people as well as testing."
"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."
"Since we started using the Quality Center for the integration of all Microsoft tools, things have been much easier for us."
"If a company doesn't have people who are skilled in programming, they definitely should go with UFT, as it's simple to use and doesn't require programming knowledge."
"This tool did a much better job recording the http requests during web load testing than other open source tools."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"I can organize test scripts pretty well."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"This product can facilitate the lowering of test execution times for operational people, as the bulk of the repeating test steps can be taken away by automating the EBS regression set in OpenScript every release."
"It helped in running performance testing cycles and identifying the bottlenecks of the application, helping our clients to run their application successfully and smoothly."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
 

Cons

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"As the releases come, support for all technologies in the systems under test that UFT currently support will be the obvious place for improvement."
"Ultimately, due to the scripting, integration, and other functionality that is missing, we may switch to another solution in the future."
"The tool is not the problem. The problem is that we can't get the tool working, because there are other issues."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"Technical support was not very good. We do reach out, but often they're unable to help."
"I would rate their technical support 2.5 out of ten."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"Transaction handling was very simple and I’d say quite primitive."
"The tool runs out of memory when the recording flows are long and involve many screens despite increasing the memory settings for OpenScript."
"Performance is slow as compared to other tools like QTP."
"The test installation pretty much destroyed my computer’s laptop performance."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"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."
"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."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
OATS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.