OpenText Silk Test vs Qt Squish comparison

OpenText and Qt Group are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.0, while Qt Group is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.3. OpenText holds a 1.5% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 2.9% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

1,407 Views
900 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 20 Qt Squish reviews

3,292 Views
2,634 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Qt Squish

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Qt Squish are products in the software testing industry, both offering unique advantages. Qt Squish has the upper hand due to its enhanced test automation features, making it a preferred choice despite a potentially higher price point.

Features: OpenText Silk Test offers robust automation capabilities with cross-platform testing, efficient for various environments. Its Classic and Open agents support multiple languages like Java and C#. Qt Squish excels with its powerful scripting, flexibility, and support for multiple GUI technologies, providing a comprehensive set of tools for complex test automation.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could improve by enhancing its integration capabilities and user interface to become more intuitive. It might also benefit from expanded scripting language support and more flexible licensing options. Qt Squish could enhance its documentation and user onboarding experience, expand integration with more CI systems, and streamline its licensing process to cater more to smaller businesses.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides a structured deployment model that integrates into development environments, supported by helpful customer service. Qt Squish offers a versatile deployment approach with detailed documentation and responsive support, facilitating smoother integration and adapting well to varied scenarios.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test has a straightforward setup cost, emphasizing ROI through efficient test automation. Qt Squish, though possibly costlier upfront, offers substantial returns with its advanced features, justifying the investment. While OpenText Silk Test is initially more economical, Qt Squish presents long-term ROI advantages with its sophisticated capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 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 Silk Test

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

17th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (20th), Regression Testing Tools (8th)

Qt Squish

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

11th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 2.9%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Qt Squish	2.9%
OpenText Silk Test	1.5%
Other	95.6%

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

Testing solution supports Java testing with good reliability

There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java. You need to set up some special environment variables to be able to do that.

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

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

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

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

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

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

"It speeds up testing efforts."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

"Now we have completely automated the Squish runs using CI tools and Squish is not at all getting stuck or creating any problem."

"Our previous, haphazard approach to testing was not effective, and using Squish has led us into an organized mode of testing."

"I can perform Java SWT."

"It is very stable."

"Squish saved our time and money by creating reusable operating system independent test scripts."

"Powerful and intuitive Integrated Development Environment (IDE) - I use this IDE daily for creating new tests, debugging tests and running tests."

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."

More Qt Squish pros

Cons

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

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

"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 pricing could be improved."

"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."

"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."

"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

"Sometimes, I had problems, but their support team resolved almost of them in short time."

"It still requires better solutions for object identification and an enhancement to identify all the objects of the AUT before building the object map."

"The most complete way of testing is on several OS's, even platforms. Here, the solution provided by Squish, through several Python script files, could be simplified in such a way, so that even black box testers could manage it easily."

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"It would make the work of the Squish user easier and quicker if Squish would display the proper feature names, when assigned."

"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."

"The only criticism I have is the IDE needed a bit of polish in version 5.2 (this may have been fixed in the latest versions)."

More Qt Squish cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."

"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."

"It is expensive."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."

"The platform is highly-priced."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Insurance Company

Marketing Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

22%

Computer Software Company

Healthcare Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	9

Questions from the Community

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?

I'm aware of the price from three or four years ago, and it depends on the number of users. For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?

I am not really using the solution during development, however, for regression and automatic regression tests, I am using it. I use it to do visual Qt, which focuses on the GUI part of the applicat...

See all answers

Comparisons

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

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 12% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 11% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Qt Squish

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 7% of the time

algoQA vs Qt Squish

Compared 3% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

March 2026

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

March 2026

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

froglogic Squish

Overview

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

Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.

Qt Group

Sample Customers

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

Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

March 2026

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Qt Squish report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.