IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management vs. OpenText UFT One

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 5.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.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
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText 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
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText UFT One
Best Alternatives
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
3.0
(22 ratings)
8.0
(12 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(6 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
4.0
(5 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
5.0
(3 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM Engineering Lifecycle ManagementOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM
The software is robust enough to handle highly complex software development or other product development and can be used well beyond the range to do what a client needs. However, because of the inability to hold its users to proper best practices, things can get wildly out of hand and cascade over the years, creating unnecessary technical debt. The system has a lot of usable features, but they don't funnel users toward the correct processes and practices.
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
IBM
  • Open Services supporting Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC).
  • Required definition management and managed capabilities enabling.
  • Rational DOORS Web Access for local on the test field presence.
  • On-sites established reporting system.
  • Approved linking requirements to test plans
  • Engineering Requirements Management DOORS traces requirements thereby eliminates manually processes and spreadsheets, for improved productivity.
  • Returns the investment efficiently.
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
IBM
  • I feel like it is too heavy sometimes and updating is not very straight forward. For example, if I want to change an incident ticket (IN) to a service request (SR) and add some comment for the change, I have to first change the IN to SR, then click refresh which takes a few seconds, then add a comment. If I forget the refresh step, my comment will be discarded without warning like my ticket is not in the latest status. This also happens when somebody else changes the ticket during my edit as I can not lock the ticket exclusively.
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
Likelihood to Renew
IBM
At the moment we are required by contract to continue to use the IBM DOORS software for our current client. Given that it can be expensive, if we were to use it after our current client's needs were met, we would have to secure other projects in order to justify the continued use of the software.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Usability
IBM
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
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
IBM
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
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.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
IBM
No problems
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
IBM
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect management. The overall cost of the tool is great too and well within budget.
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
IBM
  • It's part of CLM suite so it can be used to manage the whole lifecycle with tight integration with development module (Rational Team Concert) and quality module (Rational Quality Manager).
  • Comprehensive reports and dashboards provide better visibility.
  • License cost is on higher side.
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