ACCELQ vs. OpenText UFT One

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ACCELQ
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
ACCELQ is an agile quality management platform that helps users achieve continuous delivery for web, mobile, manual testing, and APIs. It can be used to write and manage manual test cases for the functionality that may be too fluid for automation.N/A
OpenText UFT One
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Unified Functional Testing (UFT, formerly known as HP UFT and before that QuickTest Professional or HP QTP) is a functional and performance testing tool acquired by Micro Focus from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, now from OpenText.N/A
Pricing
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Features
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Automation Testing
Comparison of Automation Testing features of Product A and Product B
ACCELQ
8.9
1 Ratings
5% above category average
OpenText UFT One
-
Ratings
Record and Automate9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-Browser Testing8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Mobile Testing8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Test Scheduling10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Test Management8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
CI/CD Tool Integration8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated Version Control10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Parallel Testing10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Object Recognition10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Data-Driven Testing9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Testing Collaboration7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Real Device Testing10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Testing Reports & Analytics9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.5 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.5 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(2 ratings)
8.0
(12 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
ACCELQ
Low code test automation, Ready to pickup platform without having much prior knowledge on automation, AI agent interactions are nearly close to real life scenarios, best API automation scale it has got, QGPT logic builder has really changed the talk with DBs in AI way, Logic insights feature is really impressive to identify possible risk while just started developing web apps.
Read full review
OpenText
UFT is well suited if the price is not an issue, and if the requirement is about testing different technologies. If the application is based on Legacy platforms like Siebel or Mainframe, UFT fares quite well. For low cost web-based projects, there are other cheap and open source tools available. If it is about API testing or Mobile Testing, it is better to use other tools like TOSCA.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
OpenText
  • The simple front end will allow novice users to easily grasp the basics of automation and give them confidence to try things for themselves.
  • UFT can scale up and run across multiple machines from a single controller, such as ALM, enabling hundreds of tests to be executed overnight.
  • There is an active support community out there, both official HPE based and independent users. This means if you do encounter a problem there is always someone out there to help you.
  • The later versions have many add-ins to plug in to other tools within the QA world.
  • Expert users are able to utilise the many native functions and also build their own to get the most out of the tool and impress people as they walk past and see the magic happening on the screen.
  • UFT also has LeanFT bundled with it, allowing automated testing at the api level - if you can convince the developers to let you in there.
Read full review
Cons
ACCELQ
  • Visual regression features
  • Test generation from UI and UX platforms like Figma
  • Manual test tools can be more integrated with AutoPilot
Read full review
OpenText
  • Its licensing cost is very high making it a very expensive tool. due to this many organisations are exploring options of license free tools like Selenium for automation. Though learning curve is large in case of Selenium but it is very cost effective & you an get lot of support online for Selenium.
  • Though the scripting time is less since its easy to create automation scripts, the execution time is relatively higher as it takes the lot of CPU & RAM.
  • Though UFT is quite stable but during long execution cycles we do get frequent browser crashing issues.
  • In terms of costing TestComplete is also one option which is not free but comes with modular pricing. You can buy what you need, when you need.
Read full review
Usability
ACCELQ
Features like low code, API automation, auto pilot and free account creations, case studies are better suited for my business into IOT space, some of the enterprise automation features are truly game changer in productivity for my team. Database migration was supported seamlessly while opted for ACCELQ solutions.
Read full review
OpenText
The ui is clean but there are lots of setting snd options which one must be fully aware so it will aid him/her during scripting
Read full review
Support Rating
ACCELQ
No answers on this topic
OpenText
HPE are quick to reply and it's possible to get through to the actual developers shuold the case warrent it. Their online system allows updates and tracking of all incedents raised.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
ACCELQ
When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review
OpenText
1. It works solid for automate SAP and S/4 Hana applications and Fiori too. 2. Teams are well versed about UFT One 3. Able to handle maintained execution results 4. Publish Automation execution results in well manner to the leadership team/stake holders 5. More help content available 6. Able to understand non technical resources about normal view.
Read full review
Return on Investment
ACCELQ
  • Overall adoption of an automation tool went up.
  • Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort.
  • Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult.
  • Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Reduces the total workload of keeping the team to test older (regression) functionality. QA testers can concentrate on ad-hoc and exploratory testing, saving time and effort across the entire project.
  • Has built a better infrastructure for the client applications on which we can rely on for stability and providing regression results for any new features being developed.
  • Led the applications a step closer to implementing agile practices and DevOps across the entire organization. Thus, providing a better turnaround time of new features to the customers and less maintenance headaches for the BAU team to address.
Read full review
ScreenShots