OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

The compared OpenText Application Quality Management and OpenText Silk Test solutions aren't in the same category. OpenText Application Quality Management is ranked #5 in ALM , with an average rating of 8.1, and holds a 5.4% mindshare in the category. OpenText Silk Test is ranked #20 in FT , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of OpenText Application Quality Management users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText Silk Test users who would recommend it.

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

5,145 Views
3,396 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

968 Views
726 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText Application Quality Management and OpenText Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Siemens and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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 Application Qualit...

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (5th), Test Management Tools (1st)

OpenText Silk Test

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (20th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (17th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Application Quality Management is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 5.4%, up 5.2% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 1.0% mindshare, down 1.1% since last year.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer at Vodafone

Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities

Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

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

"Being able to manage tests as this is something very difficult to find in other products."

"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."

"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."

"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."

"The tool's most valuable feature is that it is user-friendly, and everybody can learn to use it easily."

"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."

"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."

"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

"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 statistics that are available are very good."

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

"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."

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

Cons

"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."

"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."

"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."

"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."

"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."

"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."

"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."

"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

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

"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."

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

"The pricing could be improved."

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

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

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a perpetual license."

"I feel that the licenses are expensive. "

"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."

"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."

"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

More OpenText Application Quality Management 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 Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

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

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 18% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 38% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 20% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 9% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

August 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

August 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.

Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.

What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Centralized Data Management: Consolidates and organizes testing data efficiently.
Traceability: Ensures traceability across all stages of the testing lifecycle.
Integration Capabilities: Connects seamlessly with automation and other essential tools.
Test Planning and Execution: Supports both manual and automated tests in a streamlined manner.
Advanced Reporting: Provides robust options to generate insightful test reports.
Customization: Offers tailored solutions to fit specific organizational needs.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Efficiency: Increases test management efficiency across projects.
Scalability: Adapts to the varying scope of large-scale projects.
Lifecycle Coverage: Comprehensive management from requirement to defect tracking.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for ease of use despite needing updates.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances high initial costs with long-term savings through efficient testing management.

In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.

OpenText

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

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

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

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

August 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Siemens and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.