HeadSpin vs. OpenText UFT One

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
HeadSpin
Score 6.0 out of 10
N/A
HeadSpin is a Digital Experience AI Platform that combines a global device infrastructure, test automation, and ML-driven performance and quality of experience analytics. HeadSpin is designed to empower engineering, QA, operations, and product teams to assure optimal digital experiences across all delivery channels throughout the development lifecycle.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
HeadSpinOpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HeadSpinOpenText 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
HeadSpinOpenText UFT One
Best Alternatives
HeadSpinOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses
Sentry
Sentry
Score 8.7 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Sentry
Sentry
Score 8.7 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Dynatrace
Dynatrace
Score 8.4 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
HeadSpinOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
9.8
(17 ratings)
8.0
(12 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
HeadSpinOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
HeadSpin
We have been using HeadSpin for our web and mobile application testing. It is an easy-to-use solution that provides detailed and in-depth analytics from the testing results. We also get a wide range of live networks and devices to perform the testing from HeadSpin. It has an inbuilt artificial intelligence engine that helps us to get real-time scenarios simulated, which is very helpful for finding performance issues and improving the overall quality of the applications.
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
HeadSpin
  • Keep track of each browser we have tested and when we lastly updated them.
  • Remove any deprecated code or plugins that may cause issues with other browsers.
  • Add browser information to our site’s meta tags so that the site displays correctly in different browsers.
  • Test our website on all browsers to ensure compatibility.
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
HeadSpin
  • UI needs to be improved
  • Graphs on the dashboard are a bit laggy and need detailing for a better understanding of the user
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
HeadSpin
No answers on this topic
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
HeadSpin
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
HeadSpin
Though LambdaTest was cheaper, it did not offer the deal devices and we wanted to be 100% sure that our app offers a perfect experience to all users. Simulators and emulators are not the technology we wanted to rely on.
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
HeadSpin
  • Simplified the approach to test the mobile application on multiple devices from different vendors. This helped us to ensure the stability of the application in different environments.
  • In-depth analysis to understand the loopholes in the application design function. This helped us to improve the application design and overall user experience.
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