We performed a comparison between Katalon Studio and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The functionality of the data is very good. You can upload and disperse data using the solution."
"I rate Katalon Studio's scalability a four out of five."
"The scalability of the product is good."
"The best thing about the solution is that there is a record and playback functionality."
"We can write code in Java and it is easy to link to other JARs that we find on the internet, which is very handy."
"The most valuable feature is its automation security capabilities."
"The most valuable features of Katalon Studio are its user-friendliness and the AI smart healing capabilities."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward and easy enough to complete."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"It is a stable solution."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"Katalon Studio's pricing is expensive."
"My recently-updated Katalon studio version hangs a lot and is not a stable version."
"It would be helpful to have an automatic save feature."
"It seems to lack a few requirements that a typical customer would want. Compared to other solutions, this product is lacking."
"The free version of the solution is not user friendly at all."
"Katalon Studio could improve having visual testing, but I think they're launching that feature very soon. We would like to see an increase in the usage of AI."
"The price of the solution is a bit high. It's one of the reasons we decided not to continue using the product."
"One improvement would be if it could support more programming languages such as JavaScript or Python. Right now, it is only on Groovy, which I think is not a too popular language."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
Katalon Studio is ranked 3rd in Regression Testing Tools with 42 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Regression Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Katalon Studio is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Katalon Studio writes "Useful multiple technology platform, scalable, but usability could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Katalon Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Postman, Testim, Appium and Ranorex Studio, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, SmartBear TestComplete, UiPath Test Suite and Ranorex Studio. See our Katalon Studio vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best API Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.