LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT One

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
LambdaTest
Score 7.2 out of 10
Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
LambdaTest is a cloud-based platform that helps users run manual and automation tests of their website and mobile apps. Users can test their native mobile application (Android and iOS) and mobile websites on Real Devices on cloud or choose from emulators & simulators for a multitude of configurations.
$15
per month per user
OpenText UFT One
Score 7.8 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
LambdaTestOpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
Lifetime Free
$0
1 Concurrent session Per Month
Live
15/Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
Real Device (Includes Live)
25/ Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
Web Automation
$79/per Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
Web & Mobile Browser Automation
$99/per Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
Native App Automation
$125/per Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
Web & Mobile Browser on Real Device
$128/per Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
HyperExecute Cloud (Multi OS)
$159/per Month (Billed Annually)
per month Parallel Test
HyperExecute On-Premise
CUSTOM PRICING
Parallel Test
Enterprise
CUSTOM PRICING
Parallel Test
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
LambdaTestOpenText UFT One
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsFor Enterprises Customize plans. Please contact our Chat Support or drop us email at support@lambdatest.com
More Pricing Information
Best Alternatives
LambdaTestOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.2 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Selenium
Selenium
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.0 out of 10
Enterprises
Selenium
Selenium
Score 8.1 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 7.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
LambdaTestOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
8.4
(51 ratings)
8.9
(11 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.7
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.1
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.1
(5 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.1
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
LambdaTestOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
LambdaTest, Inc.
In my opinion, I believe LambdaTest is very good and well suited for Cross-browser testing, Mobile application testing and Automated testing. But yes, there is always scope of improvement. In my experience, LambdaTest does not currently offer robust security testing features, so when we need to conduct extensive security testing on our applications we need to use other specialized tools
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
LambdaTest, Inc.
  • Offers geolocation testing in automation which is amazing!
  • You can select browsers, timezone, country and run the capability to start testing instantly.
  • We could scale up with parallel testing on local environment without any maintenance cost.
  • Integration with project management tools like JIRA, CI/CD tools like Jenkins, Gitlab which makes our test cycle easier
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
LambdaTest, Inc.
  • Sometimes the live apps gets slow so its better that this doesn't happen more often
  • Still room to add more device vendors like, Huawei now doesn't support play services so its better thay we also have some devices which are with Huawei services only
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
LambdaTest, Inc.
LambdaTest provides video recording and screenshots of all your tests in their test logs, which makes tracking easier. Test statuses, such as Lambda Error and VM allocation, allowed us to quickly troubleshoot any build that failed while executing. So overall, it's been great to use for our Tester and Developer team.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
LambdaTest, Inc.
The customer support team is very active and cooperative. Once, I contacted them in their off timings because of an issue, I got an instant reply from the executive and he resolved the issue very efficiently. This is why we have been using LambdaTest for more than two years. It is best suited for us.
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
LambdaTest, Inc.
Implementation of Lambdatest was very easy for different project requirements.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
LambdaTest, Inc.
LambdaTest stands out from its competitors due to its affordable pricing model, intuitive user interface, and comprehensive set of features. Its real-time testing feature allows users to test their websites on a range of devices and browsers in real-time, enabling quick issue identification and resolution. The automated testing feature allows users to run tests in parallel across multiple browsers and devices, resulting in faster test execution and improved test coverage.LambdaTest's visual testing feature is particularly noteworthy as it enables users to identify visual differences between their website on different browsers and devices. This feature helps users identify and fix issues related to design or layout. LambdaTest also offers debugging tools that allow users to quickly identify and fix issues within their code.Compared to its competitors, LambdaTest offers an affordable and comprehensive solution for cross-browser testing. While each tool has its own strengths and weaknesses, LambdaTest's robust feature set, user-friendly interface, and affordable pricing make it a popular choice among developers and testers.
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
LambdaTest, Inc.
  • Automation testing has a bit of a learning curve
  • Lack of real device keep that bug in your head if not on the website.
  • Need to wait for a while for a new OS or browser version on the contrary of immediate availability in case of owning a lab
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

LambdaTest Screenshots

Screenshot of Automated ScreenshotScreenshot of mobile-browser-testingScreenshot of Automation Testing on LambdatestScreenshot of Integrate with your favorite toolsScreenshot of Real-Time TestingScreenshot of Responsive Testing