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

OpenText Functional Testing vs SmartBear TestComplete Mobile 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 Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (3rd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (4th)
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 17.1%, down from 24.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete Mobile is 2.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing17.1%
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile2.7%
Other80.2%
Mobile App 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.
AhmedAllalen - PeerSpot reviewer
Development team leader / APPR at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Clicking playback and detecting application needs improves functionality
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to understand why it's too detailed to detect or think of the browser. I use Chrome. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application. That's the problem. Also, when I run tests, I cannot export different types of logs in the same document. When I run different tests, it provides different logs, and these logs cannot be put in the same document. I have to compile them manually. Additionally, the tool can manage WinRamp scripts. I would say SilkTest also allows me to run tests, and I can challenge the sequencing, but it doesn't always do this correctly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's scalable on the enterprise level; I have already scaled a project with UFT One at enterprise level, and I am using it because it is very scalable compared to open-source tools and many other tools on the market."
"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."
"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."
"If one is looking for a software testing tool for functional parameters with an automation approach, they can go for it without any more thinking and discussion."
"The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools."
"To me, the most valuable features were the OR and code compiler (VB script) to call the framework."
"UFT is the only technology that enabled us to actually automate our core application."
"The fact that UFT One covers multiple technologies helps in terms of end-to-end scenarios."
"I like that it offers internal methods for supported controls. It is very easy to code the tests. Object Spy is also a good feature."
"There are a lot of features in this tool, making it more complete with click and playback and proper things, and it is very effective for detecting breaks and also for verifying the needs of the application before deploying it or when introducing a new product."
"The features I find most valuable is the automatic remapping of aliases because it is really helpful."
"I like that it offers internal methods for supported controls, it is very easy to code the tests, and Object Spy is also a good feature."
"It is very effective for detecting breaks and also for verifying the needs of the application before deploying it or when introducing a new product."
"The features I find most valuable is the automatic remapping of aliases, because it is really helpful."
 

Cons

"In terms of what could be improved, they need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user and if we're going to spread this throughout the organization, we'll need to spend a whole lot of money."
"Yes, there were stability issues sometimes."
"I would like to see them remove the shortcoming of working with .NET applications, as there is not much support provided for automating applications developed on .NET."
"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."
"Technical support could be improved."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"UFT still requires some coding."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"It is very difficult to use the aliases on old software."
"It is very difficult to use the aliases on old software, which hasn't been designed for us to test out."
"There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser."
"We have three test runs for 60 tests and the first time it's green, the second time one fails and so on. It is not consistent, but this problem occurs also because some of the controls are not fully supported by TestComplete."
"The mapping is pretty complicated because there are a lot of controls that are the same and if you have a long name with the object mapping it is easy to get confused."
"There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"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."
"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 tool's price is high."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
7%
Retailer
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
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 needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to un...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
The application is smaller than the transaction applications. It's a very delicate, complex application. Now I use it, however, it's just a test function for functional testing. I use TestComplete ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
It's straightforward to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
 

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
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. SmartBear TestComplete Mobile and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.