OpenText Functional Testing vs TestComplete
OpenText Functional Testing (Test maintenance and self-healing) and TestComplete (Test maintenance and self-healing) differ on 6 documented facts below. Each cell shows its evidence level, source and verification date. This page does not rank or rate either tool.
Oldest fact on this page:
Facts side by side
| Fact | OpenText Functional Testing | TestComplete |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Test maintenance and self-healing | Test maintenance and self-healing |
| Status | Renamed | Active |
| Test creation | Recording | Recording |
| Test output | Proprietary runner | Proprietary runner |
| Surfaces | Web, Mobile native, API, Desktop, ERP | Web, Mobile native, Desktop, ERP |
| Hosting | Self-hosted | Self-hosted |
| Pricing model | Usage credits | Per seat |
| Published prices | AWS Marketplace AMI (software fee per running EC2 instance, each listed instance type): $4.00 per hour (usage-based, hourly; AWS infrastructure costs billed separately; 14-day free trial) | Not documented |
| Free tier | Not documented | No |
| CI integrations | Jenkins, Azure DevOps, Other | GitHub Actions, Jenkins, Azure DevOps |
| Self-healing | Vendor stated | Documented |
| Agent integration | Not documented | Not documented |
| Open source | Not documented | Not documented |
Documented differences
Listed only where both tools document the fact, or where one documents it and the other's documentation does not mention it. Vendor-stated values appear in the table but do not create a difference here.
- Status: renamed for OpenText Functional Testing; active for TestComplete. [1][2]
- Surfaces: web, native mobile, API, desktop and ERP for OpenText Functional Testing; web, native mobile, desktop and ERP for TestComplete. [1][2]
- Pricing model: usage-credit pricing for OpenText Functional Testing; per-seat pricing for TestComplete. [1][2]
- Free tier: not documented for OpenText Functional Testing; none for TestComplete. [1]
- CI integrations: Jenkins, Azure DevOps and other CI systems for OpenText Functional Testing; GitHub Actions, Jenkins and Azure DevOps for TestComplete. [1][2]
- Published prices: listed for OpenText Functional Testing; not documented for TestComplete. [1]
When each fits
OpenText Functional Testing
Fits a team that needs API testing. Documented for OpenText Functional Testing.
Sources: [1]
TestComplete
Fits a team that needs CI integration with GitHub Actions. Documented for TestComplete.
Sources: [1]
Drawn from documented scope only. Neither text compares the two tools on quality.
Related pages
Sources
- admhelp.microfocus.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Category)
- support.smartbear.com (TestComplete: Category; TestComplete: Self-healing)
- community.opentext.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Status)
- support.smartbear.com (TestComplete: Status; TestComplete: Surfaces)
- admhelp.microfocus.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Test creation)
- support.smartbear.com (TestComplete: Test creation; TestComplete: Test output)
- admhelp.microfocus.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Test output; OpenText Functional Testing: Hosting; OpenText Functional Testing: CI integrations)
- admhelp.microfocus.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Surfaces)
- smartbear.com (TestComplete: Hosting)
- aws.amazon.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Pricing model; OpenText Functional Testing: Published prices)
- smartbear.com (TestComplete: Pricing model; TestComplete: Free tier)
- support.smartbear.com (TestComplete: CI integrations)
- opentext.com (OpenText Functional Testing: Self-healing)
Spotted an outdated or wrong fact about OpenText Functional Testing vs TestComplete? Send the source and we apply it at the next monthly update.