Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT One comparison

OpenText Silk Test and OpenText UFT One are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText Silk Test is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2. OpenText Silk Test holds a 1.1% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText UFT One’s 9.6% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText Silk Test users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OpenText UFT One users who would recommend it.
OpenText Silk Test
Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews
  • 1,159 Views
  • 787 Comparison Views
93% willing to recommend
OpenText UFT One
Read 94 OpenText UFT One reviews
  • 8,035 Views
  • 5,043 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and OpenText Silk Test compete in the test automation software category. Based on the features, UFT One may have the upper hand due to its comprehensive capabilities across various technologies, even though both products offer strong ROI and efficiency improvements.

Features: OpenText UFT One supports a wide range of technologies and applications, including HTML5, Flex, and multiple browsers. It enhances testing with UFT Flex Runtime Loader and Object Spy for superior object identification. It provides comprehensive automation across GUI, API, and business components. OpenText Silk Test offers powerful scripting and object recognition with Java and C# support. It features a strong test case and application state management system, providing efficiency and speed.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One faces limitations in supporting .NET applications and can be slow on virtual machines. Improvements are needed in browser compatibility and object identification reliability. OpenText Silk Test lacks support for the latest UI technologies and needs better integration with IDEs. Its pricing is high, and support for distributed version control systems is limited.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products are used primarily in on-premises settings, with some cloud availability. UFT One's customer service varies, with some escalation necessary for complex issues. Silk Test users report mixed experiences with technical support for complex problems. OpenText's support service management is generally prompt, though effectiveness depends on user contracts and urgency.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is often considered expensive but worth the investment due to its wide range of supported technologies and strong ROI from reduced manual testing. It offers various licensing options, including seat and concurrent licenses. Silk Test's cost is high but competitive with market solutions, providing good ROI especially for desktop automation projects. Both products enhance efficiency, leading to faster regression testing and long-term cost benefits.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: December 2024).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One
December 2024
Download the complete report
Helped 824,053 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:
 

ROI

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.5
Organizations using OpenText UFT One experience up to 300% ROI through enhanced efficiency and 60% test automation.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.9
Users rate Silk Test support highly, praising quick responses, effective service, helpful documentation, but note challenges outside the US.
Sentiment score
6.3
OpenText UFT One's customer service is praised for expertise but faces challenges with response speed and technician knowledge variability.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText Silk Test offers scalable management for multiple users, simplifying test case handling and supporting various applications efficiently.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT One is highly scalable, adaptable for varying team sizes, with some execution speed challenges in large test suites.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
OpenText Silk Test is largely stable, with some issues in long runs and compatibility, but strong support is praised.
Sentiment score
6.6
Opinions on OpenText UFT One's stability vary, with some users experiencing stability issues influenced by system specifications and configurations.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Silk Test needs GUI enhancements, better integration, improved documentation, and support for newer technologies and easier test scheduling.
OpenText UFT One needs improvements in compatibility, performance, technology support, integration, cost, and usability for enhanced user experience.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Silk Test is costly yet competitive, suitable for desktop automation, with varied licensing and maintenance fees.
OpenText UFT One is costly but valued for reducing manual testing and enhancing automation efficiency, sometimes offering discounts.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Silk Test offers a robust object model, easy scripting, cross-browser testing, and superior OCR capabilities with excellent support.
OpenText UFT One is versatile, supporting multiple platforms with AI capabilities and robust integration for comprehensive test automation.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText Silk Test report
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.1%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.6%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SrinivasPakala - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available
While we are performance testing the engineering key, we need to come up with load strategies to commence the test. We'll help to monitor the test, and afterward, we'll help to make all the outcomes, and if they are new, we'll do lots and lots of interpretation and analysis across various servers, to look at response times, and impact. For example, whatever the observations we had during the test, we need to implement it. We'll have to help to catch what exactly is the issues were, and we'll help to see how they can be reduced. Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are. The solution needs better monitoring, especially of CPU.
Read full review
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results
With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.
Read full review
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user69066 - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 11, 2013
QTP vs SilkTest WorkBench
The last few months, I've been working with the Silk Tools (particularly the WorkBench .NET variant IDE) and I must say that I like what I've been using. The libraries provided by Silk are quite good for your typical automation and when you run into custom applications, the .NET IDE (which is…
Read full review
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
See all answers
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?
My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
The user interface could be improved.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test Logo
Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test
Compared 21% of the time
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test Logo
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test
Compared 12% of the time
Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test Logo
Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test
Compared 12% of the time
Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Test Logo
Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Test
Compared 8% of the time
More OpenText Silk Test Competitors
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 31% of the time
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One Logo
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 11% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 10% of the time
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One Logo
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 8% of the time
Oracle Application Testing Suite vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Oracle Application Testing Suite vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 3% of the time
More OpenText UFT One Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Silk Test
December 2024
OpenText Silk Test reportDownload OpenText Silk Test product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
November 2024
OpenText UFT One reportDownload OpenText UFT One product report
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
 

Learn More

OpenText
OpenText
 

Overview

SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.
Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper
 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One
December 2024
Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText Silk Test vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.