No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st), Test Management Tools (1st)
OpenText Silk Test
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (13th), Test Automation Tools (20th)
 

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 8.2%, up 4.9% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.1% mindshare, up 1.1% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
Jira11.5%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.9%
Other70.4%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test2.1%
Tricentis Tosca9.4%
OpenText Functional Testing8.5%
Other80.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.
JG
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"It is beneficial for managing testing data and has integration with Excel, allowing us to download reports easily."
"It has a good response time."
"Lots of new features are being rolled out by HP including the Business Process Testing (BPT) module which is at the cutting edge of testing, both manual and automation wise."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"We see that it can combine all third parties together, free software, integrate all tools together, and create a single pipeline for development."
"ALM allows you to maintain complete end-to-end process."
"Being a large SAP shop, having the ability to track individual issues to a defined release is a key function."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting, as you get a single frame of reporting across all the various tests and the program is very user-friendly."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."
"The statistics that are available are very good, the solution offers very good detailed reports, and it's excellent for testing an application's performance levels."
"The Silk4J feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"It speeds up testing efforts."
"Using this DLL functionality we were able to automate our product."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see them move away from a desktop-type client and towards a web-based client, although we've also had ActiveX issues with web clients."
"Lacks sufficient plug-ins."
"It's doing what it should do, but it's a little bit costly. I would like to see some kind of testing analytics."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support, and sometimes, we do not get responses from them."
"Tech support is very, very poor. There is no coordination between product groups, you have to repeat the same information multiple times, features that are fixed end up breaking in the next release, and releases and upgrades do not fix problems as promised."
"Sometimes there are small customizations that we'd like that are not always available."
"Recently, I faced some issues while using the product on Mac-based machines, as I was unable to upload test cases."
"The reason why I wouldn't rate it higher than seven out of 10 is because you're still using really obsolete technology like ActiveX."
"Need to improve online documentation, community and forums to share issues encountered and solutions."
"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The initial setup is somewhat complex if you're deploying on-prem."
"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."
"The pricing could 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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."
"It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us."
"The solution was expensive for us."
"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
919,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
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 bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: October 2026.
919,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.