TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall) vs. OpenText UFT One

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Contact about F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)

Please fill out the form below to get in touch.

F5

Connect with F5

What are you interested in?

Already have an account?

You hereby consent to have TrustRadius share the information supplied on this form with F5 so that F5 and TrustRadius may contact you in regard to the information requested.

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)

    Score9.2 out of 10
    N/AF5 Distributed Cloud WAF leverages F5's Advanced WAF technology, delivering WAF-as-a-Service and combining signature- and behavior-based protection for web applications. It acts as an intermediate proxy to inspect application requests and responses to block and mitigate a broad spectrum of risks stemming from the OW ASP Top 10, persistent and coordinated threat campaigns, bots, and layer 7 DoS.N/A

    OpenText UFT One

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AUnified 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
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Free Trial
    YesNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    YesNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Considered Both Products
    F5
    No answer on this topic
    OpenText
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    98%
    Would buy again
    178 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    95%
    Delivers good value for the price
    158 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    96%
    Happy with the feature set
    174 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    96%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    129 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    95%
    Implementation went as expected
    142 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    TestComplete
    Score8 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
    Score9.4 out of 10
    ReadyAPI
    Score6.1 out of 10
    Enterprises
    F5 Big-IP Advanced WAF
    Score9.4 out of 10
    SoapUI Open Source
    Score8.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.2
    (180 ratings)
    8.0
    (12 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    7.7
    (11 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Usability
    9.1
    (3 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    Availability
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Performance
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.1
    (2 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Online Training
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    8.6
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Configurability
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Product Scalability
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Vendor post-sale
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Vendor pre-sale
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall)OpenText UFT One
    Likelihood to Recommend
    F5
    It is doing its job effectively, and its scalability is superb. So, if you have a mixed environment with cloud and on-premise systems to protect this product, provide a solution to the challenge. However, its management is more suited to DevOps teams rather than to the ones responsible for on-premise systems, making the management a bit more complex.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    F5
    • Layer seven attacks are becoming far more common. Traditionally it was always layered three, layer four, where you get an additional firewall, but with the application layer attacks become more frequent, more popular, et cetera. So having the web application firewall protecting us, and then with the recent Log4j, that's the most recent use case when it gave us that instant level of protection whilst we remediated the Log4j that we had that and the F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was protecting us.
    • I have a great relationship with the account manager, my account manager, and I think he drives the best price possible, um, for me, and I'm happy with that price.
    • F5 Distributed Cloud WAF is always innovating and evolving.
    • We run a very competitive proof value where we run numerous competitors against each other, and then we evaluate from that and then make the selection, and F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was the winner.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    F5
    • Lack of warnings, currently the console does not provide a warning when deleting key-value entry.
    • The web GUI could use some tweaking, currently no undo option when removing exclusion rules.
    • Configuration complexity, currently menus and options are hidden, making it hard to configure vs on prem.
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    F5
    We gave it an 8 because it protects our web apps well and is reliable. The WAF is flexible and meets most of our needs. It could improve in user interface and make integrations easier, but overall, it’s a solid and effective security tool for us.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    F5
    I believe is a solution that was designed from the start to be simple and easy to use. Coming from Imperva, it simply eased the burden and complexity of managing and securing our apps on different environments (cloud and on-prem). It easy to scale and very quick to deploy (as a cloud waf should be), provide us with DevOps integrations, visibility and automatic insights from multiple events that guarantee peace of mind for us analysts and opp managers.
    Incentivized
    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
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    F5
    Seems no issue
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Performance
    F5
    Unnoticed slowness
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Support Rating
    F5
    I never contacted support for this product.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Online Training
    F5
    Online training saves me lots of time
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    F5
    Just make sure you origin servers have F5 IPs allowed.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    F5
    The other one that I've used in the past, they're very similar and I haven't used it recently, so I can't do a side-by-side comparison today. But I can say that F5 does everything we want it to do consistent with what this other product did do and it's got enhanced features and of course we have a long history with F5 as a product set in general.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    F5
    Dont see any issue so far
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Return on Investment
    F5
    • The biggest gain for us was speed. Before F5 Distributed Cloud WAF, onboarding a new app to our WAF stack meant manual rule tuning, traffic sampling and regression testing. Right now, we spin up a service, tag it with the right policy and its ready (production ready) within hours
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall) Screenshots

    Product screenshotProduct screenshot