LambdaTest vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

LambdaTest and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. LambdaTest is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8, while OpenText is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0. LambdaTest holds a 4.7% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 96% of LambdaTest users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

LambdaTest

Read 28 LambdaTest reviews

2,668 Views
2,321 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

1,149 Views
827 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

LambdaTest

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 27, 2025

OpenText Silk Test and LambdaTest are competing products in the software testing space, each offering unique advantages. While OpenText Silk Test is appreciated for its pricing and customer service, LambdaTest stands out due to its extensive feature set.

Features: OpenText Silk Test provides robust test automation, strong support for complex testing environments, and a valuable object-oriented approach. LambdaTest offers an extensive range of integrations, cloud-based testing, and real-time geolocation testing.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test can improve in areas like better integration with modern CI/CD tools, simplifying its licensing model, and enhancing its cloud capabilities. LambdaTest might enhance by expanding device support, increasing availability of real devices, and refining automation scripts for increased efficiency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test is known for comprehensive documentation and structured support, making deployment smooth. LambdaTest's cloud-based model offers quick setup and flexibility, with rapid customer service for fast resolutions.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test requires a higher initial investment with a more complex licensing model, leading to a slower ROI. LambdaTest provides competitive, straightforward pricing, ensuring faster ROI with its scalable cloud solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

LambdaTest

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

6th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

9th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Silk Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

20th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

17th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.7%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
LambdaTest	4.7%
OpenText Silk Test	1.5%
Other	93.8%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Kumar Gaurav Jain

Head of QA at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Cross-platform testing and faster execution enhance testing efficiency

Don't worry about anything. Just go for it. There will not be an issue, as far as you know what you are buying and how you want to use it. Go for it, the platform is good. I rate the solution eight out of ten due to some areas needing improvement. I rate the overall solution eight out of ten.

Read full review

Jose Alfredo Garcia

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.

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

"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."

"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."

"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."

"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."

"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."

"Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."

"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."

"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."

More LambdaTest pros

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

"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 statistics that are available are very good."

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

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

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

"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."

Cons

"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."

"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."

"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."

"There is scope for improvement in service account usage, LDAP integration, and adapting new devices and features."

"The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers."

"We get logged out of the devices if there is some inactivity."

"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."

"Sometimes, when multiple users use the tool simultaneously, it can slow down, affecting efficiency."

More LambdaTest cons

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

"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 pricing could be improved."

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

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

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution."

"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."

"It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."

"This is an affordable product."

"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."

"The pricing could be made cheaper."

"LambdaTest is paid per execution."

"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."

More LambdaTest 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."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	10

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?

We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?

The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...

See all answers

What needs improvement with LambdaTest?

The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...

See all answers

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 LambdaTest

Compared 47% of the time

Sauce Labs vs LambdaTest

Compared 15% of the time

Perfecto vs LambdaTest

Compared 6% of the time

QA Wolf vs LambdaTest

Compared 3% of the time

Eggplant Test vs LambdaTest

Compared 2% of the time

More LambdaTest Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 18% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 9% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

LambdaTest

January 2026

Download LambdaTest product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

January 2026

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

No data available

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

LambdaTest offers real-time and automated testing across extensive browser and OS combinations with integrations like Jenkins and GitLab. It combines legacy and real device access for diverse compatibility, enhancing functionality and execution speed with HyperExecute and Docker tunneling.

Geared for businesses requiring robust browser compatibility, LambdaTest simplifies large-scale testing needs with seamless integration into CI/CD pipelines. Its automation features and parallel testing capabilities help detect UI misalignments quickly while reducing manual efforts. LambdaTest supports cross-browser functionality with comprehensive documentation and platform fusions like AWS for enhanced utility.

What key features make LambdaTest indispensable?

Intuitive Interface: Streamlines user experience.
Real-Time Testing: Thousands of browser and OS combinations available.
Tool Integration: Compatible with Jenkins and GitLab.
Automation and Parallel Testing: Efficient test cycles and process streamlining.
Legacy and Real Device Access: Ensures broad compatibility.
HyperExecute: Boosts execution speed significantly.
Docker Tunnel: Enables local testing with ease.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Comprehensive Documentation: Ensures ease of use and knowledge sharing.
Enhanced Performance: Fusions with platforms like AWS offer improved efficiency.
Global User Compatibility: Reduces manual testing, boosts customer experience.
CI/CD Integration: Consistent performance across teams.
Efficient Resource Utilization: Lowered manual testing efforts and cost efficiency.

In industries demanding high browser compatibility and web responsiveness, teams integrate LambdaTest for automation, real-time testing, and maintaining global user experience standards. Its use in parallel testing cycles alongside industry-driven integrations minimizes timelines and optimizes workflows effectively.

LambdaTest

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

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka

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

Buyer's Guide

LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test

January 2026

Free Report: LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test

Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our LambdaTest vs. OpenText Silk Test report.

See our list of best Functional 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.