We performed a comparison between Katalon Studio and OpenText Silk Test 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."It provides us daily feedback on the status (failing/working) of the core features of our websites."
"It is a good tool and provides all the essential features for our business requirements."
"This solution is very user-friendly to learn and implement, and less technical knowledge is required to handle automation."
"It has been good so far for API testing on Mac. It is not that hard to learn and use. There is so much support out there, so if anyone wants to start using it, there is enough help."
"The most valuable feature is its automation security capabilities."
"I personally like the 'Object Spy' feature of this tool. It makes it easy to find an element on the web page."
"The ability to build all libraries with codes and use them in many situations has been most valuable."
"Video capture on failure is a must have. A picture is worth a thousand words. A video is worth a thousand pictures (literally)."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional 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."
"Katalon Studio's pricing is expensive."
"There could potentially be more reporting within the solution. We need more issue reports, for example."
"One aspect that can be improved is testing for desktop applications. I would like to see them support more technologies in this area."
"We have been seeing some error pop-ups that are difficult to understand why they were triggered."
"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."
"My recently-updated Katalon studio version hangs a lot and is not a stable version."
"The product is comparatively slow."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"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."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
Earn 20 points
Katalon Studio is ranked 3rd in Regression Testing Tools with 42 reviews while OpenText Silk Test is ranked 14th in Regression Testing Tools. Katalon Studio is rated 7.8, while OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Katalon Studio writes " Functional automation features and the recording functionality saves time but the performance and script execution is slow ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". Katalon Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Postman, OpenText UFT One, Testim and Appium, whereas OpenText Silk Test is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT Developer and Apache JMeter. See our Katalon Studio vs. OpenText Silk Test report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing 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.