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

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs OpenText Silk Central comparison

Broadcom and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Broadcom is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #21. Broadcom holds a 2.8% mindshare in TMT, compared to OpenText’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Read 20 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reviews
  • 304 Views
  • 155 Comparison Views
90% willing to recommend
OpenText Silk Central
Read 9 OpenText Silk Central reviews
  • 231 Views
  • 140 Comparison Views
80% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

OpenText Silk Central and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are both prominent tools for requirements management and testing. Users report greater satisfaction with OpenText Silk Central's feature set and cost-effectiveness, while Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is valued for its comprehensive capabilities despite higher costs.

Features: OpenText Silk Central is highly praised for its robust test management features, user-friendly navigation, and efficient execution tracking. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer stands out with its in-depth modeling, automation functionalities, and extensive requirement coverage.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Central could benefit from enhanced reporting tools, better integration with other platforms, and modernized user interface design. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer users suggest more streamlined updates, reduced system resource usage, and improved speed of operations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Central is known for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer support, ensuring minimal downtime. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer has a more complex setup but offers detailed documentation and proactive support teams.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Central offers competitive pricing with solid ROI due to its efficient test management capabilities. Comparatively, Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, though more expensive, justifies the additional investment by delivering high ROI through extensive features and automation benefits.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central Report (Updated: January 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central
January 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
11th
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 January 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 2.8%, 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.
Read full review
it_user685080 - PeerSpot reviewer
We have many possibilities to customize the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration.
We manage more than 400 users and 120,000 test cases / year in our Test and Defect Management solution based on Silk Central, in an enterprise multi-company environment (postal, banking, insurance, telco, mobile, government, business), so for us the most valuable feature is flexibility. With Silk Central we have many possibilities for customizing the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration. In addition we have great support from Micro Focus and real collaboration to drive future direction and new features. The other valuable feature is the easy to use and immediate onboarding of manual testers and general users and test managers.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"Measuring test coverage helps in one of the most challenging tasks. It has logic that can help to select the right set of scenarios and know what coverage it will provide."
"In terms of meeting business challenges, it helped to shorten the dev/testing cycle by identifying requirements gaps early in the process, by having models shared within the development team. It helped increase test coverage and reduce the number of issues experienced by clients/customers."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
 

Cons

"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"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."
"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."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
"​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
"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."
"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
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
831,265 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.
See all answers
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.
See all answers
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.
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 41% of the time
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 30% of the time
IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 29% of the time
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors
No data available
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
January 2025
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reportDownload Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report
Buyer's Guide
Test Management Tools
January 2025
OpenText Silk Central reportDownload OpenText Silk Central product report
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.
Broadcom
Silk Central is an open test management solution which unifies all test assets into one easy-to-use planning, tracking, reporting and execution hub. Silk Central enables you to gain control, collaboration and traceability across all areas of your software testing, whether your methodology is Agile, Traditional or hybrid. Silk Central provides integration of requirements, manual and automated tests, defect tools and your test execution, giving full traceability of the quality of your software testing regardless of role.
OpenText
 

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank
AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Buyer's Guide
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central
January 2025
Free Report: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors and best Test Design Automation vendors.

We monitor all Test Management 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.