OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and OpenText Silk Test are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.3, while OpenText Silk Test is ranked #22. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers holds a 3.7% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText Silk Test’s 2.1% mindshare. Additionally, 78% of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText Silk Test users who would recommend it.

OpenText Functional Testing...

Read 39 OpenText Functional Testing for Developers reviews

6,682 Views
5,479 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

3,642 Views
2,804 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing...

OpenText Silk Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Silk Test and OpenText Functional Testing for Developers are software testing tools. Silk Test holds an advantage due to its comprehensive support and competitive pricing, whereas Functional Testing for Developers stands out with flexible and developer-focused features.

Features: OpenText Silk Test provides cross-platform testing, automated web and mobile testing, and integration with various environments. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers a developer-centric approach, CI/CD support, and robust test scripting integrated with development workflows.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could enhance user interface customization and expand support for more programming languages. Additionally, improving loading times and adding more detailed analytics could be advantageous. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers may benefit from enhanced cross-platform functionalities and more intuitive reporting. Further refining its graphical user interface and expanding language support could be considered.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test allows for seamless integration and offers dependable customer support, ensuring smooth deployment in existing systems. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers emphasizes quick deployment within developer environments and provides extensive documentation and support, enhancing developer interactions.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test offers an affordable initial cost, providing substantial ROI through cost-effective automation. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers may have higher upfront costs, but it delivers ROI by enhancing productivity and reducing testing time with its developer-centric nature.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 916,056 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 Functional Testing...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

9th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Silk Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

22nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.7%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers	3.7%
OpenText Silk Test	2.1%
Other	94.2%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities

OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.

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 cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"To the business, I would say overall it increases the amount of testing that gets done, with more people interacting with automating."

"We have UI controls in Infragistics logic that have been identified by OpenText Functional Testing for Developers, but those controls are not supported by TestComplete, which is what I find most valuable."

"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."

"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."

"I would say the most valuable is that we can get people started off really quickly on solutions because we've been partners with HPE for a long time and it helps us tailor the product to our needs."

"Customer Service: The support in the alpha/beta test phase was especially good."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."

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

"It drastically reduced our manual regression efforts that is difficult to achieve in Agile model."

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

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

"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

Cons

"It's newer so it doesn't support as many technologies which makes the investment a little bit harder for us to absorb more licenses than we currently have or to justify buying any more licenses than we currently have because it only supports a certain subset of our customers."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

"As the releases come, support for all technologies in the systems under test that UFT currently support will be the obvious place for improvement."

"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster."

"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."

"The price of the solution could be lowered."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

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

"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."

"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."

"Need to improve online documentation, community and forums to share issues encountered and solutions."

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

"The browser based testing needs to be improved."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers 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

916,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Construction Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Construction Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	12
Large Enterprise	30

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

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 8% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 7% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 7% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 11% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 8% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

September 2026

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

September 2026

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.

This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?

Complex Algorithm Handling: Manages complex scenarios with ease, including fuzzy logic.
Developer-friendly: Enables coding in C# and Java, integrating seamlessly with popular IDEs.
AI-based Object Recognition: Enhances test automation through advanced object identification.
Extensive Protocol Support: Supports a wide range of protocols for diverse testing requirements.
Seamless Integration: Connects effortlessly with ALM and Jenkins, promoting continuous development.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Functional Testing?

Efficient Test Automation: Streamlines test processes, optimizing resource allocation and reducing effort.
Multi-platform Flexibility: Facilitates cross-platform testing, accommodating desktop, web, and banking applications.
Reduced IT Workload: Simplifies automation tasks, decreasing the strain on IT resources.
Enhanced DevOps Support: Integrates well with DevOps practices for continuous testing advancements.

Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.

OpenText

OpenText Silk Test is a versatile automated testing tool known for its advanced scripting and recording capabilities in Visual Studio. It offers robust test case management, supporting cross-browser testing and seamless integration with Java and C#, providing a stable environment for automation.

OpenText Silk Test supports GUI object recognition and offers a user-friendly interface that facilitates multi-language support. It enhances test design with its object-oriented approach and integrates performance testing tools for precise data-driven tests. Silk Test excels in browser testing and performance testing across web applications, making it a comprehensive choice for regression testing, SAP automation, and performance analysis.

What are the key features of OpenText Silk Test?

Scripting and Recording Capabilities: Integrates with Visual Studio for efficient script creation.
Cross-Browser Testing: Supports multiple browsers ensuring comprehensive coverage.
GUI Object Recognition: Enhances automation accuracy with reliable object identification.
Multi-Language Support: Facilitates diverse testing environments.
Robust Reporting: Detailed insights into testing processes and outcomes.
SAP Testing Functionality: Optimizes SAP project performance.

What benefits can users expect from OpenText Silk Test?

Enhanced Test Efficiency: Streamlines automation processes for faster results.
Comprehensive Test Management: Manages test cases systematically for improved organization.
Improved Accuracy in Automation: Reduces errors with precise object recognition.
Scalability: Adapts to different project sizes and complexities.
Performance Testing Integration: Identifies and resolves bottlenecks efficiently.

OpenText Silk Test is widely implemented in industries requiring high precision in data handling and performance analysis. It is commonly used in financial services for month-end regression testing and SAP projects for effective automation. Manual, functional, and performance testing in ERP systems further showcases its diverse application in complex business environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

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

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test

September 2026

Free Report: OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

916,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation 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.