OpenText Silk Test vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

OpenText and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. OpenText holds a 1.1% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 18.5% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

968 Views
726 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 112 Tricentis Tosca reviews

21,494 Views
11,822 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 14, 2025

OpenText Silk Test and Tricentis Tosca compete in the software testing tools market. Tricentis Tosca seems to have the upper hand due to its advanced features and automation capabilities, despite OpenText Silk Test being favorable in pricing and customer service.

Features: OpenText Silk Test supports cross-browser testing, script creation, and integrates with OpenText solutions. Tricentis Tosca offers comprehensive automation, model-based test automation, and integrates with diverse environments.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could enhance its cloud deployment options, expand its feature set to increase long-term value, and improve its automation capabilities. Tricentis Tosca might need to address cost concerns, improve SAP and mobile application performance, and enhance scripting flexibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca's cloud-based deployment enables quick setup and scaling, with strong customer support through training and dedicated channels. OpenText Silk Test offers on-premises deployment with good customer support, but lacks the flexibility of cloud deployment.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test benefits from a lower initial setup cost and swift ROI, appealing to budget-conscious organizations. Tricentis Tosca, despite being higher in cost, offers long-term substantial value due to its extensive features, justifying the investment for those seeking comprehensive solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,349 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 Functional Testing Tools

20th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

17th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

112

Ranking in other categories

Service Virtualization (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 18.5%, up from 18.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tricentis Tosca	18.5%
OpenText Silk Test	1.1%
Other	80.4%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

SrinivasPakala

Director Consulting Expert at Cgi Deutschland KG

Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available

While we are performance testing the engineering key, we need to come up with load strategies to commence the test. We'll help to monitor the test, and afterward, we'll help to make all the outcomes, and if they are new, we'll do lots and lots of interpretation and analysis across various servers, to look at response times, and impact. For example, whatever the observations we had during the test, we need to implement it. We'll have to help to catch what exactly is the issues were, and we'll help to see how they can be reduced. Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are. The solution needs better monitoring, especially of CPU.

Read full review

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features

The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.

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

"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"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."

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

"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."

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

"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."

"I am impressed with the product's script test."

"One notable feature is its ability to handle negative XPath healing processes. If one XPath fails, Tosca can utilize backup XPaths to ensure test cases do not fail due to locator issues, thereby focusing on identifying application-side issues, which is the ultimate goal."

"We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool."

"It's integrated with different technologies, desktop applications, package solutions like SAP, and mobile applications."

"The product enables codeless automation."

"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

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

"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."

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

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

"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."

"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."

"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."

"Running the regression – if multiple lists are executed at once or if a list contains 200+ tests, it’s a pain to stop the execution."

"The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades. Going through this current upgrade, we were delayed a month because we are using a third-party tool. It's called Tosca Connect by Tasktop. When this latest upgrade broke that relationship between the two, it took Tricentis a month to come back with a workable solution... Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint."

"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."

"What needs to be improved in Tricentis Tosca is its centralized repository mechanism because it's not as flexible. The repository in the solution where you store the data and the script for test automation is quite an old-fashioned mechanism that could be improved."

"The product is not very stable when used with cloud storage. It is very hard to load the screen, making it difficult to use the tool in cloud storage."

"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."

"I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect. That would be like the next step."

"More and more artificial intelligence (AI) is coming in. So, some amount of AI to create natural language processing (NLP)-based test cases and manage defects would be very helpful. This is because the technologies have evolved in the last five to six months, so there is a potential opportunity there."

More Tricentis Tosca 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."

"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."

"The licensing cost for Tricentis Tosca is expensive. It has multiple features, but to use all of its features, you have to pay for additional licenses."

"The pricing and licensing of Tricentis Tosca were alright. Many customers look for end-to-end enterprise solutions, there were not many challenges with the pricing. However, the customers who are coming from Selenium or similar, feel they're paying a premium for this Tricentis Tosca license. If the right person is there for the implementation of the Tricentis Tosca, then it is one of the best tools in the market."

"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."

"The tool is quite expensive."

"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."

"I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five."

"Pricing could be better."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

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

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Retailer

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Retailer

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	22
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	72

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

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?

We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...

See all answers

How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?

Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...

See all answers

What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?

For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 39% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 19% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 13% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 11% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 9% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 7% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

August 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

August 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Orchestrated Service Virtualization

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

Tricentis Tosca offers model-based testing that supports both technical and non-technical users through a user-friendly interface, enabling scriptless automation and seamless integration with UI and non-UI applications.

Tosca's modular approach enhances test maintenance and reuse while delivering comprehensive automation for diverse testing environments. Backed by risk-based testing and automated data management, it supports end-to-end testing across API, SAP, and desktop applications. Tosca's integration capabilities extend to environments like Salesforce, PHP webshops, and mobile apps, effectively enhancing Agile team workflows. Despite its strengths, room remains for improved reporting, object recognition, and more efficient upgrade processes. Enhancing documentation and mobile testing support could further elevate its functionality for many.

What key features does Tricentis Tosca offer?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies interactions for non-technical users.
Model-based testing: Facilitates the easy creation of automated test cases.
Scriptless automation: Enables quick test development without coding.
Integration capabilities: Supports connections with multiple platforms like SAP and Salesforce.
Modular approach: Enhances the reuse and maintenance of test components.

What benefits to expect from Tricentis Tosca?

Efficiency: Streamlines the testing process for faster release cycles.
Versatility: Suitable for diverse application environments including web and desktop.
Productivity: Boosts Agile team integration for comprehensive testing.
Risk-based testing: Prioritizes testing efforts based on potential impact.

In retail, Tricentis Tosca automates inventory and transaction testing, ensuring efficient system updates. Financial services employ it for regulatory compliance through automated test scenarios in mainframe and PDF environments. Telecommunication companies utilize Tosca for API testing, aligning services across network platforms seamlessly.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

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

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

September 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

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