Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs OpenText Silk Central comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Design Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (8th)
OpenText Silk Central
Ranking in Test Management Tools
21st
Ranking in Test Design Automation
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 2.9%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Central is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Gireesh Subramonian - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe
The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints. A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority. So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.
it_user685080 - PeerSpot reviewer
A powerful platform and strong technical support help us to make the right decisions
We are primarily interested in improving the flexibility to customize parts of the tool. At this point, we feel that the customization is bad. For example, we would like to be able to automatize internal projects. We would like like to see the visibility improved, and want to perform certain tests faster. We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end. This is very important to us. In terms of usability and the interface, a few small improvements can lead to a lot of benefits. The interface is good but can be improved. The section on managing requirements for testing has to be improved. This is an old feature that has not been updated at the same rate as the rest of the tool.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."
"Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."
"Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that."
"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."
"I like the way Broadcom ARD inserts test cases in execution mode. Also, ARD can be used apart from Broadcom TDM. It's an add-on through which you supply data through ARD test cases when there is a need for extra data."
"The modeling is a game-changer."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
 

Cons

"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."
"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
"​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."
"The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Energy/Utilities Company
22%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.
What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
Micro Focus Silk Central, Borland Silk Central, Silk Central
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank
AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.