OpenText UFT One vs. Tricentis qTest

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Tricentis qTest
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Tricentis qTest (formerly QASymphony) provides enterprise-level agile testing tools giving businesses visibility and control needed to ensure application quality in fast-paced development environments. Tricentis and QASymphony merged in summer 2018.
$1,200
per year per user
Pricing
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoYes
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Features
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Test Management
Comparison of Test Management features of Product A and Product B
OpenText UFT One
-
Ratings
Tricentis qTest
8.1
38 Ratings
0% above category average
Centralized test management00 Ratings7.937 Ratings
Manage test hosts and schedules00 Ratings8.432 Ratings
Map tests to user stories00 Ratings7.78 Ratings
Test execution reporting00 Ratings8.837 Ratings
Defect management00 Ratings7.932 Ratings
Best Alternatives
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.3 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.3 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(12 ratings)
8.7
(39 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
6.0
(2 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
1.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
5.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText UFT OneTricentis qTest
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
Tricentis
Tricentis qTest integrates seamlessly with Jira, making it ideal for teams that manage user stories and defects in Jira while keeping test cases and execution in qTest. When paired with automation tools like tosca, Selenium, or WebdriverIO, qTest is excellent for aggregating both manual and automated test results in one place.
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
Tricentis
  • As a fresher, when I started using qTest it was very handy and easy to understand.
  • It helps us trace the test cases that are used to test the quality in a single location
  • The main thing is its integration with JIRA as soon as we create a ticket we would be getting all the requirements in the qTest so it became easy for me
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
Tricentis
  • In requirements , we can't add multiple test cases at once, or search multiple cases at once, need to do one by one. Here actually qtest needs to improve.
  • Linking cloud hosted qtest and on-premise TOSCA is very difficult especially when you are working with client system with security wall. It requires tunnelling software which is not recommended.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Tricentis
This has been a core QA management tool for our organization and integrates well with our other SDLC platforms (Azure DevOps/Jira/Katalon).
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
Read full review
Tricentis
qTest is actually intuitive and user-friendly, despite my other scathing review aspects
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
Tricentis
The actual answer is 0. I have never experienced worse support, whether personal or professional
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Tricentis
Again, supporting documentation could have been a lot better
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
Tricentis
All of them offer formidable solutions in the test management realm, but each one caters to different niche and need. qTest distinguishes itself with its deep integration capabilities, especially with Agile and DevOps tools, enabling streamlined CI/CD process. Its modern, user-centric interface contrasts with ALM's more dated appearance and complex setup. While TestRail provides a clean user experience and caters to a broad spectrum of business, qTest's scalability, from SMBs to large enterprises, stands out. PractiTest's cloud-based solution is geared towards mid-sized companies, but qTest's flexibility, advanced analytics, and robust reporting grant teams actionable insights. qTest' approach to a more holistic test management closely aligning with modern software development practices
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
Tricentis
  • In comparison to other Testing tools, Tricentis qTest was the most expensive.
  • We were able to quickly bring international users up to speed on how to use the tool.
  • The ability to clone a project rather than create a new one from scratch was a valuable time saver.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Tricentis qTest Screenshots

Screenshot of Customizable analytics and reports can be shared across the organization - additional read license requiredScreenshot of Centrally manage automated testing and environments, as well as schedule and or kickoff automated testing with any open source or proprietary toolScreenshot of qTest allows for true test case sharing across teams and projects to help standardize and scale knowledge and best practicesScreenshot of qTest integrates in real-time with Jira for full traceability to requirements during Agile test and developmentScreenshot of Build custom, event-driven workflows with any third-party solution, including ChatOps tools like Slack and Microsoft Teams, to streamline testing and drive collaborationScreenshot of Tricentis qTest comes with over 60 out-of-the-box metrics, with drag-and-drop capabilities to build custom dashboards