OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?

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 8.0, and holds a 8.5% mindshare in the category. OpenText Silk Test is ranked #22 in FT , and holds a 2.2% 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

22,317 Views
13,837 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

4,080 Views
3,142 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: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 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 (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (20th)

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 8.5%, up 4.5% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.2% mindshare, up 1.2% since last year.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management	8.5%
Jira	11.4%
Microsoft Azure DevOps	9.7%
Other	70.4%

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test	2.2%
Tricentis Tosca	9.2%
OpenText Functional Testing	8.7%
Other	79.9%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Greg Stone

Partner at IS Nordic AS

Manages multiple releases seamlessly

We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

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

"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."

"As long as procedures are clear, then anyone can execute the tests."

"With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."

"You should invest in Quality Center if you are looking for high visibility of project progress."

"One of the things that we've found with the HPE suite is that the interoperability is hands-down second to none."

"The ability to show end-to-end tractability between requirements, tests, defects, and also reporting."

"The independent view of elevated access is good, and the elevated instructions being sent to our SQL is valuable."

"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"Using this DLL functionality we were able to automate our product."

"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."

"Not many performance Testing tool provides end to end response times for scripts running on the page, this tool is capable of providing end to end real time browser response times."

"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."

"It speeds up testing efforts."

"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."

"It drastically reduced our manual regression efforts that is difficult to achieve in Agile model."

"SilkTest is best for desktop applications and good for web applications also with the Open agent."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

Cons

"We are looking for more automation capabilities."

"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist."

"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."

"Recently, I faced some issues while using the product on Mac-based machines, as I was unable to upload test cases."

"Pricing is not my area, but in general, what I've seen when reading articles is that it is costly."

"Upgrades are a nightmare and documentation is difficult to understand."

"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."

"ALM is a dated application, and I am researching to see what other solutions are available."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

"The browser based testing needs to be improved."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."

"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."

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

"Need to improve online documentation, community and forums to share issues encountered and solutions."

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is priceed high."

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

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."

"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."

"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."

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

"I feel that the licenses are expensive. "

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

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Construction Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Outsourcing Company

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?

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 bottlen...

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 25% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 5% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

TFS vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 11% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

October 2026

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

October 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 a scalable, user-friendly interface with seamless automation tool integration, positioned to enhance test case management and defect tracking.

OpenText Application Quality Management provides comprehensive tools for scalable test management and effective defect management, supporting real-time tracking and detailed reporting. It empowers users with enhanced traceability between requirements, tests, and defects. The customization options and integration capabilities ensure adaptability for a broad range of testing requirements to support efficient test management, execution, and reporting. Improvements are necessary in requirements traceability, user interface updates, and integration with Agile and DevOps tools. Performance and reporting enhancements, browser compatibility, licensing, costs, and customer support remain areas for growth. Users manage test cycles, log defects, and maintain test cases, benefiting from the system's ability to record results for manual and automated testing. It facilitates regression and performance testing and supports software development lifecycle tracking to ensure comprehensive coverage.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Scalability: Adaptable to extensive testing needs.
Integration: Seamless compatibility with automation tools.
Test Case Management: Simplifies creation and management.
Defect Management: Effective tracking and resolution.
Real-time Tracking: Keeps testing processes up-to-date.
Reporting: Offers detailed insights.
Customization: Tailored to testing processes.

What benefits or ROI do users typically see?

Enhanced Traceability: Links requirements, tests, and defects.
Efficiency: Streamlined test management and execution.
Comprehensive Coverage: Ensures thorough requirement mapping.
Flexibility: Adapts to testing processes and tools.
Detailed Reporting: Offers insights for improvement.

OpenText Application Quality Management is widely implemented in industries focusing on test management, defect tracking, and requirements mapping. Companies utilize its capabilities to integrate with systems supporting regression and performance testing, effectively tracking phases of the software development lifecycle to ensure comprehensive requirements coverage and insightful reporting. Transitioning to newer versions and managing large projects are seen as opportunities for increased efficiency.

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

November 2026

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 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.