OpenText Silk Test vs Qt Squish comparison

OpenText and Qt Group are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #21 with an average rating of 8.0, while Qt Group is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.5. OpenText holds a 0.8% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

780 Views
511 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 20 Qt Squish reviews

2,475 Views
1,326 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Qt Squish

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Qt Squish are products in the software testing industry, both offering unique advantages. Qt Squish has the upper hand due to its enhanced test automation features, making it a preferred choice despite a potentially higher price point.

Features: OpenText Silk Test offers robust automation capabilities with cross-platform testing, efficient for various environments. Its Classic and Open agents support multiple languages like Java and C#. Qt Squish excels with its powerful scripting, flexibility, and support for multiple GUI technologies, providing a comprehensive set of tools for complex test automation.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could improve by enhancing its integration capabilities and user interface to become more intuitive. It might also benefit from expanded scripting language support and more flexible licensing options. Qt Squish could enhance its documentation and user onboarding experience, expand integration with more CI systems, and streamline its licensing process to cater more to smaller businesses.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides a structured deployment model that integrates into development environments, supported by helpful customer service. Qt Squish offers a versatile deployment approach with detailed documentation and responsive support, facilitating smoother integration and adapting well to varied scenarios.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test has a straightforward setup cost, emphasizing ROI through efficient test automation. Qt Squish, though possibly costlier upfront, offers substantial returns with its advanced features, justifying the investment. While OpenText Silk Test is initially more economical, Qt Squish presents long-term ROI advantages with its sophisticated capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 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 Silk Test

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

21st

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (19th), Regression Testing Tools (9th)

Qt Squish

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

10th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 0.8%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 3.0%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

SrinivasPakala

Director Consulting Expert at Cgi Deutschland KG

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

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

Testing solution supports Java testing with good reliability

There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java. You need to set up some special environment variables to be able to do that.

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

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."

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

"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."

"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's easy to automate and accelerate testing."

"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."

"I can perform Java SWT."

"It is very stable."

"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."

Cons

"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."

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

"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."

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

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

"The pricing could be improved."

"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."

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

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"Support isn't always helpful. I sometimes need to find solutions myself."

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."

"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."

"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."

"You need to set up some special environment variables."

"The price could be better."

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."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."

"The platform is highly-priced."

"It is expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

22%

Computer Software Company

17%

Healthcare Company

Transportation Company

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?

I'm aware of the price from three or four years ago, and it depends on the number of users. For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?

I am not really using the solution during development, however, for regression and automatic regression tests, I am using it. I use it to do visual Qt, which focuses on the GUI part of the applicat...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 49% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 18% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 8% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 22% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 19% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 12% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 11% of the time

LambdaTest vs Qt Squish

Compared 2% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

February 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

February 2025

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

froglogic Squish

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.

OpenText

Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.

Qt Group

Sample Customers

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

Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

January 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.