TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    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

    Rapise

    Score8 out of 10
    Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
    Rapise is a software testing platform that allows users to regression test web, desktop and mobile applications. Some key features include: Playback of Tests, Test Script Editing and Data Driven Testing.

    $324

    per month (1 license)

    Pricing
    OpenText UFT OneRapise
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    OpenText UFT OneRapise
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details—Discount available for annual billing (up to 10%).
    More Pricing Information
    Best Alternatives
    OpenText UFT OneRapise
    Small Businesses
    TestComplete
    Score8 out of 10
    BrowserStack
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    ReadyAPI
    Score6.1 out of 10
    BlazeMeter
    Score8 out of 10
    Enterprises
    SoapUI Open Source
    Score8.3 out of 10
    Tricentis Tosca
    Score8.8 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    OpenText UFT OneRapise
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.0
    (12 ratings)
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    OpenText UFT OneRapise
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    The appropriate scenario to use Rapise is when we have a project that is considered from medium onwards, since Rapise will help us to define, develop and implement the testing phase in a reliable and efficient way. Also with Rapise we will not have to worry about the platform that we are using since it has great versatility and flexibility.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    • Simple recording front-end and easily captures UI objects for later interaction
    • Flexible programming interface provides a multitude of manners in which to interact with learned UI objects
    • Javascript based IDE is easy to learn
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    • For tests that require specific approaches it is necessary to have advanced knowledge of programming in javascrip, which sometimes the QA team does not have experience
    • Sometimes I have noticed that when using object dragging errors occur intermittently
    • The integration with some tools (Dynamics) is only with the basic functions from my point of view
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    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
    Inflectra Corporation
    No answers on this topic
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    No answers on this topic
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    Mmuch better from a flexibility perspective
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Inflectra Corporation
    • The primary objective of the institution is a service to the public, so everything that improves response times to the public helps us to achieve it.
    • As a department in charge of the development of systems and applications, our objective is fulfilled by delivering quality products and tools such as Rapise help us greatly
    • The return on investment can be more than justified by fulfilling the primary objectives
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    Rapise Screenshots

    Screenshot of the testing dashboardScreenshot of the integrated testing environmentScreenshot of the reporting interface