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

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

 

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 (19th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (17th)
 

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 6.8%, up 5.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.0% mindshare, up 0.9% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management6.8%
Jira11.0%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.5%
Other72.7%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test2.0%
Tricentis Tosca9.9%
OpenText Functional Testing7.1%
Other81.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
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

"Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements."
"Highly customizable GI, easy for designing product backlog, with a whole bunch of metrics on the dashboard page and built-in retrospective and continuous integration features."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"It has sped up our regression testing cycle almost three times what it is if we do it manually."
"It empowers us to do more testing, our testing is being done for customers, and the solution enables us to conduct risk-based testing by linking requirements of a certain risk factor and showing in a report once they are covered."
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"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."
"Using this DLL functionality we were able to automate our product."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"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 scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"It speeds up testing efforts."
"SilkTest is best for desktop applications and good for web applications also with the Open agent."
 

Cons

"I've faced a couple of bugs in the product whereby we were not able to open attachments on a particular ticket."
"Its performance is horrible, and it's unnecessarily complex, which means the local site administrators set it up to be used in very unproductive ways."
"GUI colours not that great"
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"Upgrades are a nightmare and documentation is difficult to understand."
"I think the biggest challenge with ALM is getting useful data in one place."
"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."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help."
"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"At that time, we never had good technical support in Bangalore."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"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.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

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.
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

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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.