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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText Silk Central comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 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

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (10th)
OpenText Silk Central
Ranking in Test Management Tools
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Test Design Automation (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 2.7%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Central is 1.5%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then put all the test cases, and put all the build code for the shared location. And then rational that shared location means that RQM has access to the shared location. So, when we execute, if a test case is automated, we can run it from RQM. We need to have the environment ready for it to execute. Once we have that, then we can select the task case. So, by clicking on one button, the other environment is automatically plugged in. Then test results will be automatically transferred back to our RQM. So, in RQM, we can view it, and it is integrated. So we can run the test and the automation from RQM, and the test results will come back. Azure DevOps first test case is there, but then we tried to use Selenium to do half automation. Still, we realized that it wouldn't have the integration. We could do something in the pipeline, but it fires the Selenium test automation code. But then the test results won't be brought back or added to AzureDesk DevOps. That's something that I do hope that there can be another other system that can have this kind of integration. RQM can be improved because it's not related to our server and could be faster. We need to find out how much database storage is needed and keep increasing it. We heard that the latest version of RQM can clean up some old ones and give the same test result. But that one feature we are yet to use. It's a setting that we can set up, and then it goes automatically or gives me the choice to do it manually.
it_user685080 - PeerSpot reviewer
A powerful platform and strong technical support help us to make the right decisions
We are primarily interested in improving the flexibility to customize parts of the tool. At this point, we feel that the customization is bad. For example, we would like to be able to automatize internal projects. We would like like to see the visibility improved, and want to perform certain tests faster. We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end. This is very important to us. In terms of usability and the interface, a few small improvements can lead to a lot of benefits. The interface is good but can be improved. The section on managing requirements for testing has to be improved. This is an old feature that has not been updated at the same rate as the rest of the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases."
"RQM's best features are integration with test automation and performance testing."
"Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need. It has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability."
"It's very reliable as a solution."
"The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage, so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert. That's the most important aspect."
"RQM is something that we use everyday, so it has to be up and running, otherwise we would lose everything."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
 

Cons

"Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement."
"Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licenses of these tools (the whole CLM package) is very costly as compared to other vendors' tools."
"Each license includes 12 months of customer support. A free 90-day trial of the software is also available."
"The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
853,271 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational Quality Manager?
The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational Quality Manager?
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then pu...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational Quality Manager?
We create test cases, and then we need to plan a new task plan feature from the existing task case file and execute the test results, which will be saved in RQM. So that is how we are using the too...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
Micro Focus Silk Central, Borland Silk Central, Silk Central
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText Silk Central and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
853,271 professionals have used our research since 2012.