Silk Test vs Testim comparison

You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Micro Focus Logo
3,651 views|2,410 comparisons
Testim Logo
1,321 views|714 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Silk Test and Testim based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Silk Test vs. Testim Report (Updated: November 2022).
654,658 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."

More Silk Test Pros →

"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests.""The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved.""The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios.""The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."

More Testim Pros →

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

More Silk Test Cons →

"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind.""The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved.""The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level.""There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."

More Testim Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
  • More Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    654,658 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We used it for data-driven automated tests that have numeric calculations with high precision requirements. We probably are using the version from two years ago.
    Top Answer:It is a fine product. It is just like any other tool. It is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment. Our way to get that on top of our workload was to find a short term contractor. If you've got the… more »
    Top Answer:A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing.
    Top Answer:The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers.
    Top Answer:I'd advise users to take advantage of the Implementation meetings, monthly discussions, and pro licensing.
    Top Answer:The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level. Some lists have values that are returned in different orders… more »
    Average Words per Review
    Average Words per Review
    Also Known As
    Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
    Learn More
    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.

    Testim is an end-to-end agile testing automation solution which utilizes machine learning for test authoring, execution, and maintenance. Users can create tests in minutes, run thousands of tests in parallel across different browsers, integrate with their existing CI/CD and collaboration tools, and more.

    Learn more about Silk Test
    Learn more about Testim
    Sample Customers
    Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
    Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality
    Top Industries
    Computer Software Company23%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Computer Software Company26%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    Company Size
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise60%
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise52%
    Buyer's Guide
    Silk Test vs. Testim
    November 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Silk Test vs. Testim and other solutions. Updated: November 2022.
    654,658 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Silk Test is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews while Testim is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews. Silk Test is rated 7.6, while Testim is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Silk Test writes "A stable solution with good scripting feature, but needs better scalability and a bigger pool of third-party contractors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Testim writes "Great REST API features, good technical support, and makes it easy to onboard new testers". Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Testim is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Functionize, Selenium HQ, TestProject and LambdaTest. See our Silk Test vs. Testim report.

    See our list of best Functional 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.