OpenText Silk Test vs Zeenyx AscentialTest comparison

OpenText and Zeenyx are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0, while Zeenyx is ranked #17 with an average rating of 10.0. OpenText holds a 0.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Zeenyx’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Zeenyx users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

773 Views
384 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Zeenyx AscentialTest

Read 13 Zeenyx AscentialTest reviews

377 Views
83 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Zeenyx AscentialTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Zeenyx AscentialTest compete in the test automation space. OpenText Silk Test has an edge in integration capabilities, while Zeenyx AscentialTest stands out with comprehensive testing features, appealing to those seeking robust solutions.

Features: OpenText Silk Test offers broad integration with various platforms, supports Java and C#, and features a powerful 4Test language. It excels in browser testing for JavaScript applications and supports distributed test runs. Zeenyx AscentialTest provides easy test script authoring, drag-and-drop test creation, and strong PowerBuilder support. It uniquely captures snapshots for object recognition and includes built-in Subversion for file management.

Room for Improvement: For OpenText Silk Test, user documentation could be more detailed, support for newer browser versions could improve, and the learning curve for beginners might be steep. Zeenyx AscentialTest could enhance integration with non-standard databases, improve its script debugging capabilities, and offer broader language support outside of its current options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test provides flexible deployment and solid technical support, ensuring quick setup across environments. Its customer service is reliable, though it can be enhanced with more personalized interactions. Zeenyx AscentialTest is notable for a straightforward deployment process and highly personalized customer service, easing initial setup and reducing implementation time.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test has a significant initial cost, potentially offset by its integration capabilities that promise substantial ROI in complex environments. Zeenyx AscentialTest offers cost-effective setup with pricing models that ensure quicker ROI due to its efficient feature set. The decision may depend on balancing the initial budget against long-term integration needs.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (20th)

Zeenyx AscentialTest

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

17th

Average Rating

9.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 0.9%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zeenyx AscentialTest is 0.3%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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

Tobias Roth

Software developer at Weiss GmbH Softwarelösungen

Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration

The concept of reusable steps in Zeenyx AscentialTest has significantly enhanced our test automation efficiency. Encapsulating common actions into modular steps reduces redundancy in test scripts and ensures consistency across scenarios. This approach streamlines maintenance efforts, allowing updates to be applied universally, making our test suite more agile and adaptable to evolving project requirements. The concept of reusable steps is a key factor in maximizing reusability and maintainability in our test automation strategy. AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows. This capability ensures precise interaction with various components of an application's interface, further enhancing the reliability and effectiveness of our automated tests.

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."

"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."

"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."

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

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

"The statistics that are available are very good."

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

"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."

"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."

"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."

"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."

Cons

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

"The pricing could be improved."

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

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

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

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

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

"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."

"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."

"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."

"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."

"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."

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."

"Once it starts generating ROI, which for us took between three and six months, one will not even think about the investment."

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

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Retailer

Healthcare Company

20%

Government

13%

University

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

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 Zeenyx AscentialTest?

AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Zeenyx AscentialTest?

While Zeenyx AscentialTest has proven to be a valuable asset in our testing processes, there are areas where improvements could enhance the overall user experience. One notable aspect is the user i...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Zeenyx AscentialTest?

We use AscentialTest for automated testing of Powerbuilder applications via CI/CD pipeline with GitLab. We have fully integrated all tests in our CI/CD pipeline. Thanks to the integration, much wor...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 50% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 15% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 15% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

SmartBear TestComplete vs Zeenyx AscentialTest

Compared 100% of the time

More Zeenyx AscentialTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

June 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Zeenyx AscentialTest

May 2025

Download Zeenyx AscentialTest product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

AscentialTest

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

AscentialTest™ by Zeenyx Software is an enterprise level Test Management System that encompasses Test Planning, Development, Data Management, Execution and Defect Tracking for applications running on Windows, the web, java, dotNet, terminals and PowerBuilder. This “next generation” testing solution allows users to build robust automated and manual tests from reusable components created by its powerful object recognition engine without recording or scripting. Our patented ‘snapshot’ technology generates graphical representations of the application under test which allows users to build ‘Steps’ by dragging and dropping objects in a visual test editor. Reusable Steps are combined to form a multitude of automated and manual tests that are easy to create and maintain. With AscentialTest, companies realize a dramatic reduction in test creation and maintenance times, resulting in increased productivity and lower costs.

Zeenyx

Sample Customers

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

TJX Companies, Nuance Communications, Ericsson Inc., Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, Accenture, Nutrition Coordinating Center, Univ. of MN, iConectiv, Fortress Software, and LMP Corp.

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest

May 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest report.

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