Bitbar vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

SmartBear and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #27, while OpenText is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0. SmartBear holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Bitbar

Read 3 Bitbar reviews

681 Views
383 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

773 Views
384 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Bitbar

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Bitbar are competing products in the test automation tools category. Bitbar holds an advantage with its extensive mobile testing features despite being more expensive, as users find the cost worthwhile due to its capabilities.

Features: OpenText Silk Test offers advanced scripting, test management capabilities, and cross-browser testing. Bitbar features a cloud-based mobile testing platform with vast device coverage and parallel testing options. The advanced mobile testing capabilities of Bitbar, supporting a variety of devices and platforms, are a significant advantage.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides a straightforward deployment process and dependable customer support, facilitating quick integration into current systems. Bitbar, while complex due to its cloud infrastructure, may experience longer deployment times but benefits from responsive online support. For users prioritizing advanced mobile testing, Bitbar's deployment is more appropriate.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test is more affordable initially, appealing to budget-conscious businesses, and offers significant ROI through its test management features. Bitbar requires a higher initial investment due to its cloud setup but promises substantial ROI with its comprehensive testing options and device coverage, making the higher cost justified for extensive mobile testing needs.

To learn more, read our detailed Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

Bitbar

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

27th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Platforms (11th)

OpenText Silk Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (20th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 0.8%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 0.9%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1288116

Head of Digital & Cognitive Services at a tech company with 11-50 employees

A testing platform with a good API for apps, but pricing is complicated

I like that the AI Testbot is a near-zero code application for testing. For this use case, the function is good. The services are robust. Game testing and the API for apps are also good. From the perspective of pricing, licensing, ease of use, integration with other applications, impact complexity, and integration with other tools, we're pretty much very satisfied.

Read full review

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

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ability to use different frameworks."

"Game testing and the API for apps are good."

"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."

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

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

"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."

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

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

Cons

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."

"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."

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

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

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

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

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

"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 pricing could be improved."

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."

"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."

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

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Bitbar

Compared 38% of the time

Sauce Labs vs Bitbar

Compared 35% of the time

LambdaTest vs Bitbar

Compared 15% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs Bitbar

Compared 12% of the time

More Bitbar Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 50% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 15% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 15% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Mobile App Platforms

June 2025

Download Bitbar product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

June 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Testdroid

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.

SmartBear

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

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway

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

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test

May 2025

Free Report: Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test

Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Bitbar vs. OpenText Silk Test report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.