OpenText UFT One vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

OpenText and Progress Software are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while Progress Software is ranked #24. OpenText holds a 10.1% mindshare in FT, compared to Progress Software’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

7,140 Views
4,477 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

1,024 Views
655 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio are competing products in the automated testing tools category. Data comparisons suggest OpenText UFT One has the upper hand due to its robust integration capabilities and broader testing scope.

Features:OpenText UFT One provides advanced integration capabilities, extensive test automation for mobile, web, and enterprise applications, and supports a wide range of technologies and protocols. Telerik Test Studio is known for agile automation testing, robust debugging features, and offers coded steps for complex scenarios along with an intuitive recording mechanism.

Room for Improvement:OpenText UFT One could benefit from simplifying its setup process, improving its user interface for beginners, and enhancing performance for complex test scenarios. Telerik Test Studio would improve by expanding its testing scope, providing better integration options, and offering more advanced reporting features.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service:OpenText UFT One involves a more complex setup but includes comprehensive support through extensive documentation and support channels. Telerik Test Studio offers a straightforward deployment process, focusing on rapid implementation with accessible support services.

Pricing and ROI:OpenText UFT One requires a higher initial investment, justifiable by its expansive test coverage and integration benefits suitable for large enterprises. Telerik Test Studio, offers competitive pricing with faster ROI, appealing to agile teams due to its efficient setup and robust capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 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 UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

3rd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

24th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

11th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (22nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.1%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.2%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

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. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

Read full review

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

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

"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."

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"The initial setup is relatively easy."

"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"The way it identifies elements is good."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

Cons

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"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."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."

"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."

"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."

"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."

"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

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

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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...

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?

UFT still requires some coding. If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again. Additionally, customer support could be improved as they take days to ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 38% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 17% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 12% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 9% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 2025

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

No data available

Overview

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications.

Read white paper

OpenText

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation 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.