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

OpenText Silk Test vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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 Functional Testing Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (17th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.9%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI1.9%
OpenText Silk Test1.8%
Other96.3%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
PK
Lead QA Engineer at Msys Technologies
Experience effective testing with flexible licensing alongside pivotal insights on essential improvements
For non-functional testing, I focus on performance and security. For performance and security tests, I used REST API, SoapUI, and JMeter. These tools help us conduct thorough testing across these dimensions. I find ReadyAPI helpful especially in overcoming security issues, as we experienced slowness in the application after merging our JAR files. For instance, if a person wants to access a university database and encounters a timeout error, we learned through ReadyAPI that the issue was due to HTML protocol limits with the payload. We fine-tuned this process to display the expected data effectively. I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing. ReadyAPI is a versatile tool for creating multiple testing frameworks and validating various parameters seamlessly. REST API is the tool I use to test all three types of articles, meaning I validate the APIs I send to my peers or clients for functional testing, and I also perform security testing to ensure the URL and data passed through multiple components adhere to policies and user privileges. This is done through functional security testing using the REST API tool, and for performance, I ensure that applications can be accessed simultaneously by multiple users without hindrance or slowness through thorough performance testing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."
"The statistics that are available are very good, the solution offers very good detailed reports, and it's excellent for testing an application's performance levels."
"It drastically reduced our manual regression efforts that is difficult to achieve in Agile model."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"ReadyAPI is pretty straightforward and offers many helpful features, and many things automatically get integrated into it so it is quite a useful tool."
"The most valuable feature has been the assertion as a test step as this has allowed us to increase the scope of testing and validation."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"It is the best tool that I have ever seen for API testing."
"Without it, we cannot release anything."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"I recommend this solution to new users because it is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."
 

Cons

"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The product could be improved by including an inherent feature for UI automation."
"ReadyAPI could improve by adding a conversion tool from one file type to another."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"Advanced functionalities could be improved."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
"Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
"We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"The price of the solution has been fine."
"It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years."
"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."
"The solution is dynamically priced so you only pay for what you use."
"It is expensive. Each user needs to be licensed, and there are different licenses within the product. It starts with 750 euros for a single user per year, but for the full product features, you need to pay a lot more. There are three versions. This cost is for functional testing, and then there is a cost for load testing and virtual services. If you want to use these areas with the functional test license, you are limited. You hit some limits in these functions. If you have all three licenses, then you have full functionality for the API."
"The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
889,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Insurance Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise28
 

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 ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI. We created an in-house dashboard to display automation runs across projects, which required manual updati...
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
889,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.