OpenText Business Processing Testing vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

OpenText Business Processing Testing and OpenText Silk Test are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked #36, while OpenText Silk Test is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0. OpenText Business Processing Testing holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText Silk Test’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText Business Processing Testing users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText Silk Test users who would recommend it.

OpenText Business Processin...

Read 7 OpenText Business Processing Testing reviews

493 Views
419 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

1,407 Views
1,013 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Business Processin...

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and OpenText Business Processing Testing are products in the test automation sector. OpenText Business Processing Testing often holds the upper hand due to its robust features and enhanced capabilities.

Features: OpenText Silk Test is notable for its automation of web, mobile, and enterprise applications with strong cross-platform support, flexible script sharing, and a powerful object model for windows declarations. OpenText Business Processing Testing emphasizes process-driven testing, advanced modular testing capabilities, and allows nontechnical testers to partake in automation processes.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could improve the speed of application script modifications, enhance browser recognition for newer technologies, and simplify the integration with cloud-based services. OpenText Business Processing Testing may benefit from reducing its learning curve, enhancing integration with non-OpenText systems, and expanding its process integration capability to handle more diverse business environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides a user-friendly setup with comprehensive documentation and immediate support. In contrast, OpenText Business Processing Testing, with its complex setup, requires a thorough onboarding process, but it comes with commendable customer service support.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test is affordable with a swift ROI appealing to budget-conscious organizations. In contrast, OpenText Business Processing Testing, despite higher initial costs, promises high long-term ROI through improved efficiencies and reduced operational errors.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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 Business Processin...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

36th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 (17th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.7%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test	1.7%
OpenText Business Processing Testing	0.8%
Other	97.5%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Revanth Reddy

Consultant at Infrasoft Technologies

Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases

There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.

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 big difference with BPT over conventional frameworks with which I have worked is that BPT allows me to separate test development from automation development."

"The BPT framework is very modular."

"We can now take test automation through the entire business process -- testing web service availability before automated test packs start, sending and retrieving data via web-services and control of all web service testing in a single tool, along with the GUI testing of business processes across a multitude of platforms from java web through to AS400 green screen terminal apps."

"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."

"ROI is pretty good as the approach of framework allows virtually everyone to take part in designing test cases."

"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."

"Because everyone can create test cases, not only the quantity but also the quality is improved, which results in less defects in production."

"Not many performance Testing tool provides end to end response times for scripts running on the page, this tool is capable of providing end to end real time browser response times."

"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."

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

"SilkTest is best for desktop applications and good for web applications also with the Open agent."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"It speeds up testing efforts."

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

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

Cons

"Initial releases we used of the product (v12) were a little unstable, but with the release of v12.01, we had no further issues."

"The only one I can really think of is speed to test execution."

"Test execution speed has been my biggest concern."

"Technical support lacks efficiency and all they do is to move in circles by opening new tickets and all the related stuffs without any intention of solving the real problem."

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."

"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."

"To be honest, technical support is not that great."

"At that time, we never had good technical support in Bangalore."

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

"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."

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

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

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"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

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Insurance Company

Marketing Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

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

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

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 17% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 14% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 12% of the time

Telerik Test Studio vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 8% of the time

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing

March 2026

OpenText Business Processing Testing report

Download OpenText Business Processing Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

March 2026

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

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

Migros Bank AG

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

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test

March 2026

Free Report: OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Business Processing Testing 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.