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

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Qualitia Automation Studio comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 Test Automation Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th)
Qualitia Automation Studio
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualitia Automation Studio is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.5%
Qualitia Automation Studio1.1%
Other95.4%
Test Automation 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.
SY
Head Of Solutions at Test Yantra Software Solutions
Testing automation solution that is scriptless and is competitively priced compared to other solutions
The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it. Within four weeks, my team was up and running. This was the shortest possible ramp-up that we completed in my entire career The integrations for this…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Within a week, two of my global customers were able to leverage their automation through this solution, and the adaptability of how this slotted in was just amazing, which was incredibly efficient."
"With the experience that I have, I think that it's very good, and I would recommend this solution to others."
"We have UI controls in Infragistics logic that have been identified by OpenText Functional Testing for Developers, but those controls are not supported by TestComplete, which is what I find most valuable."
"LeanFT integrates with our developers work-flow, so our developers can now perform automation using familiar tools, programming language, and IDE, which helps get the whole team involved in test automation."
"And I think all these parts together make it the best possible solution."
"Every single feature on offer is valuable and useful."
"When they've been working with it for a while and they see the complexity when you're doing real and tough test situations, then they see that this kind of tool is very, very good."
"This is a good solution and I recommend it."
"Qualitia is a complete test automation tool where you can configure multiple test cases at once."
"The Qualitia technical support group is the best part of Qualitia."
"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."
 

Cons

"I think the one thing we're basically asking for should be JavaScript support, but I think they will start adding JavaScript support in the future."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."
"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."
"This solution is not scalable at all."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another one."
"I would rate technical support a one out of five."
"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."
"Licensing and missing import/export functionality was a problem."
"When using team city to run offline packages, Press Keys do not work, thus giving errors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"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."
"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."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"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."
"Pricing is on a higher end but the competition was even more expensive. With this considered, it is a competitive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
No data available
 

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
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Springer, PTC, ZS, Shaadi.com, JDA, Cbazaar
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. Qualitia Automation Studio and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.