OpenText Silk Test vs UiPath Test Cloud comparison

OpenText and UiPath are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.0, while UiPath is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. OpenText holds a 0.8% mindshare in TAt, compared to UiPath’s 5.1% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of UiPath users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

693 Views
436 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

UiPath Test Cloud

Read 25 UiPath Test Cloud reviews

2,626 Views
1,579 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

UiPath Test Cloud

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 19, 2025

OpenText Silk Test and UiPath Test Cloud compete in the automation tools category. Analysis indicates that UiPath Test Cloud may have a competitive edge due to its advanced features, though OpenText Silk Test is often preferred for its pricing and support.

Features: OpenText Silk Test is noted for its automation capabilities across multiple platforms, user-friendly scripting interface, and strong support for distributed test runs. UiPath Test Cloud offers intelligent automation with AI-driven testing, seamless integration with the UiPath ecosystem, and efficient management of testing cycles.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could enhance its cloud capabilities, streamline its initial setup process, and improve integration with third-party tools. UiPath Test Cloud might benefit from cost reductions, more comprehensive support for non-UiPath applications, and enhancement of its low-code features for broader user accessibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: UiPath Test Cloud simplifies deployment with its cloud-based setup, easing scaling and maintenance, and offers responsive customer support. OpenText Silk Test, while reliable, may require more initial setup due to on-premise deployment options.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test is attractive for its competitive pricing structure, often leading to favorable ROI considering initial and long-term costs. UiPath Test Cloud, despite a potentially higher initial cost, offers substantial ROI by reducing manual workload and enhancing automation capabilities over time.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 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

19th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

19th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (8th)

UiPath Test Cloud

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

3rd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (7th), Mobile App Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 0.8%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 5.1%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation 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

Deborah Yarosh

VP Technology Automation at Finance Of America Mortgage LLC

Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement

UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment. The QA Manager needs to track which tests have been completed, the success rate, and other relevant information. The ability to have manual tests show up in multiple projects is a requirement that is not easily done in Test Suite. We have submitted the following enhancements request to UiPath and are waiting for them to address these issues before migrating our manual testing to the UiPath Test Suite platform. * Ability to import manual test cases from an Excel Spreadsheet. * Ability to create release folders and have manual tests under the folders (sub-folders are also needed). * Ability to copy tests between projects (manual and automated). * Ability to execute manual test cases in any order and skip tests if needed. * Ability to assign and see who has been assigned to test cases – need to know who created the test case and who executed the test case as they could be different people. * Ability for the QA manager to see which test cases have been run and which haven’t as well as which ones were successful, and which weren’t. * Ability for the QA manager to track defect cycles for a particular release. * Improving Search functionality – must enter the exact test case name in current search functionality. * Ability to extract key data for artifacts for Release Management or Audit* Test Set or Individual Cases, * Include Test Results (passed / failed), * Include how many iterations a test case went through until it passed.

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 feature I like most is the ease of reporting."

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

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

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

"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 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 detailed logging is invaluable."

"It is feature-rich. It has more features than other RPA tools."

"It's useful for automating tasks."

"What I like most about UiPath Test Suite is that it's straightforward, and any user who knows how to use the UiPath Studio can learn how to create a test script in as fast as thirty minutes. There's nothing new you must learn to use UiPath Test Suite because it only has three sections: Given, Then, and When."

"It has reduced all the deployment cycles of the automation solutions by forty percent."

"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."

"It is a very scalable product."

"In terms of integration with other lifecycle tools and applications, UiPath Test Suite works very well because of the basis of RPA, and how RPA and automation can handle different applications and different areas of expertise."

More UiPath Test Cloud pros

Cons

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

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

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

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

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

"The pricing could be improved."

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

"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."

"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."

"It would be very beneficial to do load testing with Test Suite."

"If I publish a test case in Test Manager as well as in Orchestrator, the existing test case does not get replaced. It is appending the test case but not replacing it."

"I'd like the solution to be even more automated."

"The product releases sometimes have issues."

"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."

"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."

"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."

More UiPath Test Cloud 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 consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced per year."

"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."

"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."

"I don't necessarily have a problem with the pricing of the UiPath Test Suite, especially because we're using the testing bot licenses as opposed to the unattended licensing."

"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."

"Its price is a bit high."

"It is a little bit more expensive than Selenium, but it provides value for money. There are multiple types of licenses such as the Test Suite license, Studio Pro license, Test Manager license, and Test Robot license. The overall cost estimation is 13,800 dollars."

"I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing."

More UiPath Test Cloud pricing and cost advice

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

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 do you like most about UiPath Test Suite?

Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?

I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced p...

See all answers

What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?

They can improve the dashboard by adding some widgets for reporting. Also, currently, they don't have defect management modules. If they could add defect management, it could work independently wit...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 51% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs UiPath Test Cloud

Compared 44% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs UiPath Test Cloud

Compared 19% of the time

Eggplant Test vs UiPath Test Cloud

Compared 10% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs UiPath Test Cloud

Compared 7% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs UiPath Test Cloud

Compared 6% of the time

More UiPath Test Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

April 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

UiPath Test Cloud

April 2025

Download UiPath Test Cloud product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Test Suite

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

UiPath Test Cloud revolutionizes testing through advanced AI agents, enhancing productivity in software assessment.

UiPath Test Cloud, with its AI-augmented automation, offers testers enterprise-grade capabilities for over 190 technologies. Featuring seamless integration with tools like Orchestrator and CI/CD pipelines, it streamlines testing processes and cuts maintenance costs. While users value its functionalities, the need for enhancements in mobile automation and third-party integration, particularly with Jira, is recognized. Efficient test organization through Test Manager and simplified process management via the cloud are noteworthy. Enhancements in reporting and file management are sought, highlighting areas for development.

What are the key features of UiPath Test Cloud?

Drag-and-Drop Programming: Enables easy test creation with minimal technical knowledge.
Robust Robotic Functionality: Offers reliable automation across a wide array of technologies.
API Integration: Ensures seamless connectivity with existing systems.
Detailed Logging: Provides comprehensive logs for better analysis and debugging.
Test Manager: Organizes tests efficiently and simplifies management.

What benefits should users evaluate in UiPath Test Cloud?

Enhanced Productivity: Accelerates test creation and execution.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces manual effort and maintenance expenses.
Cross-Platform Support: Offers flexibility in testing across different environments.
Improved Quality: Delivers high-quality software with speed and efficiency.

Organizations across industries utilize UiPath Test Cloud for testing types such as origination, smoke, and web application testing. Common implementations include testing in supply chain management, regression testing, and integrating workflows. Teams find it beneficial for ensuring functionality and efficiency in mobile app testing, enabling cross-platform support for RPA and applications like Oracle and SAP.

UiPath

Sample Customers

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. UiPath Test Cloud report.

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