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

OpenText Silk Test vs Ranorex Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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
7.3
Ranorex enhances productivity, saves time and costs, automates testing, and improves efficiency with positive feedback on flexibility.
 

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.
No sentiment score available
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText Silk Test offers scalable management for multiple users, simplifying test case handling and supporting various applications efficiently.
No sentiment score available
 

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.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Silk Test needs GUI enhancements, better integration, improved documentation, and support for newer technologies and easier test scheduling.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Silk Test is costly yet competitive, suitable for desktop automation, with varied licensing and maintenance fees.
Ranorex Studio is seen as costly yet justified, offering flexible licensing with negotiable prices and customizable user fees.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Silk Test offers a robust object model, easy scripting, cross-browser testing, and superior OCR capabilities with excellent support.
 

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
Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (3rd)
 

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 Ranorex Studio is 3.8%, up from 3.1% 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.
Aws V - PeerSpot reviewer
Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet
There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman. Additionally, expanding language support beyond C#, Java, and JavaScript to include Python would be beneficial. An AI feature that automatically detects automation object properties and suggests actions would be a great addition. So, in future releases, AI solutions for automated property identification would be helpful.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
 

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.
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.
What do you like most about Ranorex Studio?
Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ranorex Studio?
I'd rate it around five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, not too cheap but not overly pricey.
What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?
There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman. Additionally, expanding languag...
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.