Likelihood to Recommend 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 Well Suited for: Web Application Testing: It excels in automating tests for web applications, including e-commerce websites, CRM systems, and internal web-based tools. Its codeless approach and AI-driven test creation make it suitable for testing various web applications. Regression Testing: It is well-suited for regression testing, where existing test cases need to be executed repeatedly to ensure that new code changes do not introduce defects. Testim's self-healing capabilities help maintain test stability when the application's UI changes frequently. Cross-Browser Testing: Tricentis Testim is an excellent choice for cross-browser testing. It allows organizations to create tests that can be executed across different web browsers, ensuring consistent functionality and user experience. Not suited for: Complex Desktop Applications: Tricentis Testim is primarily designed for web application testing. It may be less appropriate for automating tests of complex desktop applications or applications that do not have a web-based UI. Highly Technical Testing Needs: Organizations with highly technical testing requirements, such as complex API testing or intricate database testing, may find Testim's codeless approach limiting. Specialized testing tools may be more appropriate.
Read full review Pros 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 Very intuitive and easy UX/UI Great support team for any question Ability to create automated tests from zero without knowing code Read full review Cons 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 Backend test has issues to perform. Cost wise perhaps, it's on the higher end Speed Read full review Usability We are using Testim all the time. Every new, big we roll out feature has tests and it is our only tool for regression tests.
Read full review Support Rating 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 They are very helpful and responsive. If I had any issue they helped solve it, even if it was neglect on my part.
Read full review Alternatives Considered 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 Testim provides features like Codeless Automation, Rapid Test creation, Self healing tests, parallel test execution which
Selenium lacks. Secondly Tricentis has reduced maintenance and ease of adoption.
Read full review Return on Investment 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 Insightful and efficient reporting Fast test execution Read full review ScreenShots Tricentis Testim Screenshots