OpenText Silk Test vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

OpenText and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.0, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. OpenText holds a 0.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 20.4% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

872 Views
544 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 109 Tricentis Tosca reviews

14,913 Views
8,247 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Tricentis Tosca are competing tools in automation testing solutions, with Tricentis Tosca edging ahead due to its robust feature set.

Features: OpenText Silk Test is notable for cross-browser and cross-platform testing, lightweight IDE, and strong Java/C# support. Tricentis Tosca shines with model-based test automation, the TBox feature for complex test scenarios, and integrated test data management.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could enhance its IDE usability and scripting flexibility. It also needs stronger support for newer web technologies. Tricentis Tosca would benefit from easing deployment complexity, improving support for mobile applications, and optimizing its pricing structure for broader accessibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides straightforward deployment with reliable customer support, quickly resolving user issues. Tricentis Tosca offers exhaustive training resources to navigate its more complex deployment, balancing its intricate setup with solid support.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test is recognized for lower initial costs and good return on investment, making it attractive for budget-conscious projects. Tricentis Tosca, while pricier, offers significant long-term benefits through its comprehensive capabilities, leading to higher ROI in large-scale, complex projects.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,040 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 Functional Testing Tools

19th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

19th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

109

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 0.9%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 20.4%, up from 16.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing 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

Antonio Oteri

IT Telecom Quality Senior Tester at TIM

Ability to automate tests across various platforms and simplifies test creation

From what I've seen with my colleagues who make the software selection, the prices for this software in Brazil are too expensive to be applied to anything but huge customers. I'm surprised because I was in charge of planning and control at the company before, when there was a manager there. Normally, the company has structural licenses that are based on the company they are selling to. I see that these companies cannot spend this money on Tricentis. I think Tosca is losing this type of market. They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies. The same happened in the past with SAP, which changed its policy and also made licenses for low.

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

"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

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

"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."

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

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

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

"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."

"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."

"To me, what stands out the most about Tricentis Tosca is that even if I'm not a technical tester, I could pick up on how to use it very quickly because of the mechanisms of the tool, for example, its scanning mechanism. I'm not so technical, but I'm able to maneuver through Tricentis Tosca and derive capability. It's a user-friendly tool. It's not very complex."

"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."

"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"Makes optimal use of Model-based Test practice in getting Object-references from the application."

"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

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

"There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."

"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."

"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."

"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."

"We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration."

"The solution is expensive."

"The technical support services are generally good, though there are areas for improvement regarding response time and overall competence."

"Very difficult to get information about licensing costs."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

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."

"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."

"My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing."

"There are two licenses: single user and multiple user. A multiple-user license means that several people can work together on one project and collaborate on code stored in a central location. A single-user license is for people working alone on a one particular application. It's much cheaper than a multi-user workspace. If you are getting a large volume of licenses for an enterprise, you can probably negotiate a discount, but I'm not sure about that."

"The price of Tricentis Tosca is approximately Є10,000 for one license. However, it used to be much cheaper, but they changed their license structure. It used to be a structure where if you bought a license you would receive one year of free support and maintenance. Now they only have a yearly license, and that is expensive."

"The pricing is high, but altogether it offers you the ability to automate all sorts of applications: desktop, web, mobile, etc."

"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."

"A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros."

"It is an expensive tool compared to other test automation tools. It has a lot of advantages over other tools."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

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

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

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

How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?

Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...

See all answers

What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?

For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 61% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 13% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 11% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 7% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

March 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

March 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

No data available

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

Tricentis Tosca is primarily leveraged for test automation across web, SAP, API, and mainframe applications, offering robust support for both regression and functional testing.

Tricentis Tosca's test automation capabilities extend to front-end and back-end testing, including processes like RPA and UI-based regression tests on Microsoft Windows. It supports Agile environments with multiple applications, enabling Salesforce automation, API endpoints, and end-to-end automation workflows. Tosca caters to diverse testing needs, integrating well with tools like Jenkins and Bamboo, although upgrades and customizations present challenges. Licensing costs and performance issues during loading and scanning are concerns, along with substantial learning curves for new users. Enhanced AI features and better reporting are on users' wishlist.

What are the key features of Tricentis Tosca?

Tosca BI: Ensures data integrity and accuracy in business intelligence testing
Tosca Commander: Centralized control for easy test management and maintenance
Model-Based Test Automation: Facilitates test creation without scripting
Integration Capabilities: Works seamlessly with Jenkins and Bamboo for CI/CD
Diverse Application Support: Compatible with mobile, web, APIs, and SAP
Scriptless Nature: Simplifies usage and reduces maintenance efforts

What benefits should users consider?

Enhanced Automation: Streamlines testing processes, saving time and resources
Scalability: Adapts to growing demands within an organization
Test Management: Centralized control enhances efficiency and oversight
Ease of Use: Scriptless approach lowers the barrier to entry for users

Tricentis Tosca is implemented across various industries, serving sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail with test automation solutions to ensure application quality and reliability. Agile teams in these industries benefit from its multi-application support and ability to manage complex end-to-end testing workflows. The tool's integration capabilities are particularly useful in environments that rely on CI/CD pipelines, ensuring continuous testing and quick feedback loops.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

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

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

March 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca 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.