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

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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

Katalon Studio
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (4th)
OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Regression Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Katalon Studio is 14.5%, down from 17.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Regression Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Katalon Studio14.5%
OpenText Silk Test1.6%
Other83.9%
Regression Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Keerthi Prasannakumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Has improved test efficiency and automated repeated sanity checks using reusable components
The best features Katalon Studio offers include its user-friendly nature. It is very much a user-friendly automation framework that supports both beginners and advanced users. It combines manual and script-based testing, allowing easy recording of steps and customization using Java or Groovy. Its built-in reporting, data-driven testing, and CI/CD integration are extremely useful for managing end-to-end automation efficiently. The best feature of Katalon Studio is its ease of setup with both manual and scripted automation, plus strong integration techniques, which help the tester find reports easily. It is more focused on debugging, reusability, and reporting. The reporting and debugging features of Katalon Studio help me in my testing workflow by providing test execution reports with logs, screenshots, and videos for failed steps, which makes it easier to analyze results. The report can be in formats such as HTML, PDF, or integrated into Katalon TestOps for tracking trends over time. For debugging, I use the debug mode to run test cases step-by-step, check every value, and inspect the console and log viewer for error messages. Katalon Studio highlights the exact failed step, provides stack traces, and helps quickly identify issues in locator data or synchronization. For example, in one of my projects, I automated a video upload and a preview feature in a web application. During execution, the test failed at the preview validation step. The Katalon Studio report showed that the preview element was not visible within expected time. I switched to debug mode, added a wait condition, and re-ran the test step-by-step to verify that the video preview loaded correctly before validation. After updating the script with an explicit wait, the test passed consistently, confirming all steps were successful and improving the reliability of future regression runs. Katalon Studio's report and debug mode help identify whether it's a timing issue or if we need an explicit wait. A key feature I notice in Katalon Studio is its cross-platform automation, supporting web, mobile, API, and desktop testing in one tool. The record and playback feature is my favorite because I'm not from a coding background. It allows for quick test creation without coding, making it accessible even for beginners. The repository and data-driven testing provide centralized storage for test elements, improving reusability. We can run the same test with multiple sets of data, which is also significant. The integration part is excellent, along with reusable test suites and keywords, which allow modular and maintainable test structures across projects. Katalon Studio has positively impacted my organization by significantly speeding up the testing process. The repetitive regression tests that used to take hours or days are now completed in a day or just two to three hours. The built-in reports and debugging features improved communication with developers and made issue resolution faster. With Katalon Studio providing detailed reports, false arguments have gradually reduced. Overall, test coverage, accuracy, and team productivity have enhanced, allowing for a more confident delivery of builds and shorter turnaround times. I think the company has a positive impact overall.
SrinivasPakala - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available
While we are performance testing the engineering key, we need to come up with load strategies to commence the test. We'll help to monitor the test, and afterward, we'll help to make all the outcomes, and if they are new, we'll do lots and lots of interpretation and analysis across various servers, to look at response times, and impact. For example, whatever the observations we had during the test, we need to implement it. We'll have to help to catch what exactly is the issues were, and we'll help to see how they can be reduced. Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are. The solution needs better monitoring, especially of CPU.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are now performing automated testing in 15 minutes, which were previously taking a long time when doing it manually."
"I would recommend Katalon Studio, especially if you do not require a license."
"The most valuable feature of Katalon Studio is visual testing. It compares the look and feel of an application which is useful."
"It provides us daily feedback on the status (failing/working) of the core features of our websites."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward and easy enough to complete."
"The best feature is the split up between test cases and the test object. This allows us to easily change an error."
"The most important feature is the Jenkins integration; it is pretty straight forward and allows us to run nightly builds."
"Katalon Studio has positively impacted my organization because I have noticed that I can save more than 50% of our time automating test cases."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"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."
"Katalon doesn't support testing of hybrid applications. It's a limitation."
"Katalon's support is not very strong unless you opt for the enterprise version."
"There could potentially be more reporting within the solution. We need more issue reports, for example."
"They need to work on documentation to make it more centralized and easier to find what you are looking for."
"The reporting is very good, but it could be better."
"I've seen that our clients are not truly aware of the power behind Katalon."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is freeware, so there is no charge for using it."
"The price is not high it's good."
"We are using the free version of Katalon Studio at this point."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing is good. It is the market average."
"It is freeware software, so start using it."
"The product is affordable. It has an average and competitive pricing compared to other vendors."
"The tool's pricing is cheap compared to other alternatives. I would rate the tool's pricing a three out of ten."
"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Katalon Studio?
Katalon Studio is on the expensive side. I rated it eight on a scale where ten is very expensive. I recommend optimizing the pricing, as a moderate value around five would be preferred.
What needs improvement with Katalon Studio?
The pricing could be improved. Offering a discount on Katalon Studio licenses could encourage more users. There is significant competition, so providing a good offer with extra features could be be...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Silk Test?
The pricing depends on the license used. The pricing is similar to others in the market.
What is your primary use case for Silk Test?
The product is used for manual, functional, and performance testing. I'm using the tool for loading data into ERP systems.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Coca-Cola Tesla Black Board TaTa Consultancy Services Sony
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Find out what your peers are saying about Katalon Studio vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.