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

OpenText Functional Testing vs SmartBear API Hub comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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 API Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (3rd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (4th)
SmartBear API Hub
Ranking in API Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
3.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the API Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 13.9%, up from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear API Hub is 1.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing13.9%
SmartBear API Hub1.5%
Other84.6%
API Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.
AR
QA automation at Sun Life Financial
Automated API and database regression testing has reduced resources and improved insurance validation
I have noticed some errors regarding the connection with Bitbucket or Git. It generally takes some time in SmartBear and ReadyAPI. From the testing perspective, it saves a lot of time because it covered a whole regression suite with database and data-driven testing. It generally saves us time from fetching the values manually from UI. Instead, you can run your regression suite on a daily or weekly basis. This helps us to identify some errors as well as saves us time. There is a delay in connection with SmartBear API Hub; sometimes the connection is lost between the Bitbucket and ReadyAPI. When we try to reconnect those from the properties level, from the setting level, it generally takes a lot of time. This perspective can be improved with the Bitbucket and Git connection. We can also integrate a particular framework in ReadyAPI itself so that we can also run our Selenium code from the UI automation perspective. Right now, we are currently using that feature, but it requires framework-level changes. We can provide it to every user so that users can easily run their Selenium scripts, fetch the APIs, and validate the database. This helps us to create one-to-one end-to-end flow for the purpose of testing. We can enhance that feature and we can also enhance the Git functionality because we are using Sourcetree as well for connecting Bitbucket and ReadyAPI in order to push and pull our changes. That particular functionality takes a lot of time. Sometimes the changes that we have made in our regression suite are not reflecting on the recent changes in ReadyAPI. This is sometimes difficult to track and takes a lot of time to refresh that. I would say we should enhance the UI automation feature and we can also enhance the Git connection feature as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features are its support for multiple technologies, ease of coding, object repository, and ability to design our own framework. The recording playback feature allows those unfamiliar with coding to use the tool."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files."
"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."
"For us, object recording is the most valuable and most used feature."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"UFT is easy to use for functional testing, so for me it’s very important that it can travel across a large range of technologies."
"SmartBear API Hub has positively impacted my organization as it helps to create our regression suite as well as connection with Jenkins to run smoke testing and regression settings, it saves a lot of time and it is one tool for every testing."
"SmartBear API Hub has positively impacted my organization by improving API quality, reducing manual testing efforts, and enabling faster feedback through test automation."
"I want to add that the best part was we got one single platform where we can do everything from governance to contract validation to development to testing in a single tool rather than hopping from one tool to another, and I guess that's the best feature anybody can think of."
"Having a single source of truth for API contracts makes it easier to understand the request and response schemas, keeps automation test cases aligned with the API changes, and reduces misunderstandings during the development and testing cycle."
 

Cons

"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"In cases of longer tests (in forms of so-called Mega Scripts), there can be a seriously huge usage of virtual memory by UFT that can lead to SystemOutOfMemory exceptions which are showstoppers and a huge annoyance."
"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"SmartBear API Hub can be improved, as every product has challenges."
"Sometimes the connection is lost between the Bitbucket and ReadyAPI and when we try to reconnect those from the properties level, from the setting level, it generally takes a lot of time."
"I would want to see user experience enhanced, as navigating a large collection of APIs can sometimes be challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"It's an expensive solution."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."
"The price is reasonable."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
6%
Computer Software Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear API Hub?
My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing has been positive, as these expenses were covered by my company, resulting in a mutually beneficial outcome.
What needs improvement with SmartBear API Hub?
I don't think I'm the right person to say how SmartBear API Hub can be better since I want to spend more time checking it out before just blurting out suggestions. So far, so good, and I don't real...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear API Hub?
My main use case for SmartBear API Hub is that I was looking for a better tool in the market that can handle everything from documentation to contract testing, to API testing as an independent tool...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. SmartBear API Hub and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.