OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

The compared OpenText Application Quality Management and OpenText Silk Test solutions aren't in the same category. OpenText Application Quality Management is ranked #3 in ALM , with an average rating of 8.2, and holds a 6.5% mindshare in the category. OpenText Silk Test is ranked #19 in FT , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 1.9% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of OpenText Application Quality Management users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText Silk Test users who would recommend it.

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

11,849 Views
7,109 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

2,160 Views
1,598 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText Application Quality Management and OpenText Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Report (Updated: May 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

May 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 896,467 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

OpenText Application Qualit...

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)

OpenText Silk Test

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (19th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (18th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Application Quality Management is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 6.5%, up 5.5% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 1.9% mindshare, up 1.0% since last year.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	6.5%
Jira	11.2%
Microsoft Azure DevOps	9.5%
Other	72.8%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test	1.9%
Tricentis Tosca	10.1%
OpenText Functional Testing	6.8%
Other	81.2%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone

Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities

Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Read full review

Jose Alfredo Garcia

Manager of Central Excellence at Alpura

Easy to set up with good documentation and easy management of testing cycles

The solution allows for a complete test cycle. The management of testing cycles are easy. We have good control over test cases. We can capture functional testing very easily. We're actually able to accelerate testing now and have end-to-end cycles for testing. We didn't used to have these capabilities. It's easy to automate and accelerate testing. The product offers very good cross-browser testing capabilities. We can do continuous testing and regression testing.

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's our main hub for everything around testing, especially when it comes to defect and department management."

"The primary HP QC modules, requirements, test plan, test lab, and defect management have become, over time, foundation stones in our project teams development methodology."

"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."

"It's helped in formalizing and adding structure to what was up to that point in time a series of checklists that were not version controlled."

"It is still the best QA tool on the market that integrates with most of other tools we use."

"For a test management department, and we are highly audited, by the way, it allows us to have a single repository for all our projects where we do tests, as one go-to place for our test evidence."

"The ability to have visibility of manual and automated test results within the one product certainly cuts down on the management overhead and eases the creation of project health reports."

"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"The statistics that are available are very good, the solution offers very good detailed reports, and it's excellent for testing an application's performance levels."

"It speeds up testing efforts."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting, as you get a single frame of reporting across all the various tests and the program is very user-friendly."

"The solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."

"The Silk4J feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

Cons

"When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects."

"Technical support is a black box. It's not good."

"ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser."

"It’s too expensive for most organizations compared to some other tools on the market."

"I think the biggest challenge with ALM is getting useful data in one place."

"We do have some suggestions on reporting. Most of the time we need to download data and then we create reports ourselves."

"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."

"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"At the moment, when we are trying to use this tool, we are finding quite a few compatibility issues between the tool and the applications on the test. We wouldn't consider it perfectly stable for that reason."

"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."

"The pricing could be improved."

"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."

"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."

"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."

"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."

"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."

"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."

"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."

"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

896,467 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Performing Arts

Marketing Services Firm

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Construction Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	161

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	10

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Silk Test?

The pricing could be improved.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 20% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 8% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 8% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

May 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

May 2026

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

OpenText Silk Test is a versatile automated testing tool known for its advanced scripting and recording capabilities in Visual Studio. It offers robust test case management, supporting cross-browser testing and seamless integration with Java and C#, providing a stable environment for automation.

OpenText Silk Test supports GUI object recognition and offers a user-friendly interface that facilitates multi-language support. It enhances test design with its object-oriented approach and integrates performance testing tools for precise data-driven tests. Silk Test excels in browser testing and performance testing across web applications, making it a comprehensive choice for regression testing, SAP automation, and performance analysis.

What are the key features of OpenText Silk Test?

Scripting and Recording Capabilities: Integrates with Visual Studio for efficient script creation.
Cross-Browser Testing: Supports multiple browsers ensuring comprehensive coverage.
GUI Object Recognition: Enhances automation accuracy with reliable object identification.
Multi-Language Support: Facilitates diverse testing environments.
Robust Reporting: Detailed insights into testing processes and outcomes.
SAP Testing Functionality: Optimizes SAP project performance.

What benefits can users expect from OpenText Silk Test?

Enhanced Test Efficiency: Streamlines automation processes for faster results.
Comprehensive Test Management: Manages test cases systematically for improved organization.
Improved Accuracy in Automation: Reduces errors with precise object recognition.
Scalability: Adapts to different project sizes and complexities.
Performance Testing Integration: Identifies and resolves bottlenecks efficiently.

OpenText Silk Test is widely implemented in industries requiring high precision in data handling and performance analysis. It is commonly used in financial services for month-end regression testing and SAP projects for effective automation. Manual, functional, and performance testing in ERP systems further showcases its diverse application in complex business environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

May 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: May 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

896,467 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.