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

OpenText Silk Test vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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
22nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.3%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.3%
OpenText Silk Test2.3%
Other92.4%
Test Automation 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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Lead at Emerson
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SilkTest is best for desktop applications and good for web applications also with the Open agent."
"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The Silk4J feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"It helped to automate all the possible functional test cases which I previously used to do by manual testing."
"TestComplete is a great product."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Test automation with TestComplete significantly (estimated 80%) reduced the regression timeline for a complex AUT with a large number of test cases."
"The initial set-up was exceedingly simple."
"Selenium integration."
 

Cons

"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."
"Need to improve online documentation, community and forums to share issues encountered and solutions."
"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."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help."
"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."
"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."
"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools like Notepad++."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"Product ungracefully crashes or hangs sometimes."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"The integration tools could be better."
"One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete."
"From my understanding, the product has changed significantly since v5 was released. I don’t know that it has necessarily improved, for my needs."
 

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."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
921,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
 

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 Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete?
We are using SmartBear TestComplete ( /products/smartbear-testcomplete-reviews ) for automation over applications.
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
921,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.