OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
ReadyAPI (formerly SoapUI Pro, LoadUI Pro, and ServiceV Pro) is a REST and SOAP API functional testing tool that enables software developers, QA engineers, and manual testers to work together to create, maintain, and execute complex end-to-end API tests in their CI/CD pipelines without needing to code.N/A
Pricing
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Considered Both Products
OpenText UFT One
Chose OpenText UFT One
[My] company uses UFT across different projects and different departments for all types of testing and automation.
ReadyAPI
Chose ReadyAPI
1. Less coding.
2. Easy to use.
3. Even people with less experience in coding can use it.
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
BlazeMeter
BlazeMeter
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 7.8 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 7.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Likelihood to Recommend
8.9
(11 ratings)
8.2
(66 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(18 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
9.9
(3 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText UFT OneReadyAPI
Likelihood to Recommend
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
SmartBear
As stated, we do a LOT of API testing, the swaggerhub import makes it easy to add APIs. This is very well-suited, as well as easy management of the steps/cases/suites inside of ReadyAPI. The one thing I do wish ReadyAPI was better suited for is changes to data, we have a lot of test cases in ReadyAPI and if we make a change to how the backend data is structured, one-by-one adjustments need to be made to the steps. Less appropriate, UI testing.
Read full review
Pros
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
SmartBear
  • Ease of use (ability to automatically import API definitions, Jenkins integration for running in the pipeline).
  • Detailed test reports (allow to easily identify weak spots during both functional and performance testing).
  • One platform for all tests (allows to closely couple and reuse existent tests).
Read full review
Cons
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
SmartBear
  • Needs good documentation
  • Need to improve the performance of the tool
  • Setup is very complex and for such [a] commercial tool, it should easy and straightforward
  • Tool says it supports security testing but in reality, it is not at an extensive level.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
The only reason this isn't a '10' is because of the cost. This product is definitely meant for organizations who are serious about making sure they invest in the full ecosystem of API design, development, maintenance. But there is a significant cost associated with this investment. and because of this cost (and the non-tangible output for executives), it is a difficult line-item to justify in this post-pandemic environment.
Read full review
Usability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
SoapUI allows us to combine multiple tests and adhere
to the sequence that they need to run in order to complete successfully.
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
Soap UI has managed to continuously build on it's solid foundation and keep improving by each release. It is by far the most dependable and accurate testing tool out there of its kind. Available via connecting to VM's created as SoapUI test machines give access to it anytime, anywhere practically.
Read full review
Performance
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing.
Read full review
Support Rating
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
SmartBear
To be honest, we didnt had much issues with the support, as there is already plenty of online communities available for help. But if ever there were some minor issues with the membership or the certificates, the tech support was always quick and efficient enough to resolve the issue ASAP
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
no very easy but lacks documentation
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
SmartBear
ReadyAPI provides intuitive GUI capabilities compared to their own open source product. When compared to Postman, ReadyAPI also supports SOAP based services, which is a saver especially when integrating with legacy or other third party systems.
Read full review
Scalability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing. However, I have read that added monitoring tools have been added, which if so the 7 could possibly go to a 8 or 9.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
SmartBear
  • Very quick regression testing, hence having the testing results very soon, even the same day of deployment
  • for same above reason, it can save money for corporation (so no tedious, costly and erroneous manual testings)
  • The test reports are compatible with TestNG, so the corporation can integrate the reports in our Autamation frameworks such as Allure or Jira Zephyr
Read full review
ScreenShots