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

OpenText Silk Test vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 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 Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (18th)
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
22nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.0%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Silk Test2.0%
ReadyAPI Test2.3%
Other95.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Assurance Test Engineer at Dormakaba
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With the help of SilkTest we've automated a bunch of routine regression tests, thus we saved our testing team weeks of testing time."
"The Silk4J feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"SilkTest is best for desktop applications and good for web applications also with the Open agent."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"This product is quite useful for us."
"We run around 10,000 different validations, including database validations, and we can complete the entire aggregation in less than one hour."
"Great tool. Makes API testing super easy to set up and use."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."
"I think this is a very easy tool to use for automated tests to run in a CI environment."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"The solution saves us a ginormous amount of time; we used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
 

Cons

"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"The pricing could be improved."
"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."
"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 UI should be improved a little."
"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything. It takes up a lot of space on my laptop, but I have to install the WSDL again If I don't save it."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"Sometimes you have to reload the project when you are moving/reorganizing tests in a project."
"When it comes to scalability, SoapUI has some room for improvement right now."
"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."
"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy."
"For automation commands, it should be able to do what SmartBear is doing with ReadyAPI."
 

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."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"The cost is not that bad."
"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."
"SoapUI Pro is open source but it has a subscription-based model which involves some more features. At the moment we are using the free version. The Pro version requires a license, and it is an annual license to use it."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"We have team members who are working in shifts, and it is not possible for us to utilize a single license on a single piece of hardware so that multiple team members can use it. We have to take out multiple licenses for each team member."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.