No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
17
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
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management8.5%
Jira11.4%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.7%
Other70.4%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test2.2%
Tricentis Tosca9.2%
OpenText Functional Testing8.7%
Other79.9%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

GS
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.
JG
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Definitely support of the agile methodology is the most valuable feature."
"ALM has got really a good feature which captures screens, decodes them and puts them in a code format."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"It has a good response time."
"All types of data can be seen in one place."
"We previously used RTM, and we switched because ALM is better than IBM RTM tool."
"I would highly recommend this product because it is a very stable product."
"The biggest benefit is it’s a seamless way for demonstrating the validity of the testing effort from requirement: test planning, execution, and ultimately, reporting."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"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 solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see the idea of users being flushed out more, so not just, "This defect is now assigned to a particular person," or "This person is assigned to execute a test.""
"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."
"Release management and integration with other tools."
"The dashboard was not working at first. Later on, it was difficult to customize it."
"Technical support can be a bit hit and miss."
"The QA needs improvement."
"Pricing is not my area, but in general, what I've seen when reading articles is that it is costly."
"Agile model support not very good"
"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."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"At that time, we never had good technical support in Bangalore."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."
"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less 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."
"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"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 Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
919,919 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

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.
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...
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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: October 2026.
919,919 professionals have used our research since 2012.