Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Silk Central vs PractiTest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

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 Silk Central
Ranking in Test Management Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Test Design Automation (4th)
PractiTest
Ranking in Test Management Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Central is 1.6%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PractiTest is 2.7%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user685080 - PeerSpot reviewer
A powerful platform and strong technical support help us to make the right decisions
We are primarily interested in improving the flexibility to customize parts of the tool. At this point, we feel that the customization is bad. For example, we would like to be able to automatize internal projects. We would like like to see the visibility improved, and want to perform certain tests faster. We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end. This is very important to us. In terms of usability and the interface, a few small improvements can lead to a lot of benefits. The interface is good but can be improved. The section on managing requirements for testing has to be improved. This is an old feature that has not been updated at the same rate as the rest of the tool.
DC
Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat
It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
 

Cons

"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large."
"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Silk Central, Borland Silk Central, Silk Central
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Central vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.