Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Silk Test vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 16, 2025

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 Regression Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
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
113
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 15.7%, down from 19.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tricentis Tosca15.7%
OpenText Silk Test1.4%
Other82.9%
Functional Testing 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.
SJ
Test Automation Specialist at Accenture
Has useful scanning, basic web application automation, and data validation capabilities
The main issue with Tricentis Tosca is its cost, which is very high. Although using Tosca can reduce the number of testers needed compared to open-source tools like Selenium, companies might still need to focus on resources. I would recommend Tricentis reduce the cost of its licenses. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten as I am satisfied with it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"Tosca can go through platforms to make end-to-end testing across CRM, billing, provisioning, order management flow, and databases to check for errors."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The most valuable feature is being able to create a test case by recording some scenarios and then leasing that task case to other scenarios."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"The scriptless automation tool is one of the important features."
"Makes optimal use of Model-based Test practice in getting Object-references from the application."
"The initial setup isn't too difficult."
"The reporting is really nice."
 

Cons

"The pricing could be improved."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"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."
"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."
"There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."
"The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic."
"I would say the reporting part of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
"Product quality has declined as it grows, and its updates aren't without fault. The process of resolving problems has slowed, and as it expands into other areas like NeoLoad and other testing tools, the product becomes more complicated. It used to be a small firm with a clear goal, but as it grows, the quality has been affected."
"Very difficult to get information about licensing costs."
"A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software, particularly during upstream testing, before system and unit testing."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."
"The tool is expensive. It has become overpriced, especially after Tricentis Tosca grew as a company. Initially, we bought a license with an annual support fee, which wasn't too expensive. However, they changed the model, and now we have to purchase a license yearly, which has become quite costly."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the pricing a ten. The licensing model is based on a yearly basis."
"In terms of the licensing costs for Tricentis Tosca, we are spending more or less $70,000 per year. We have a very complex mechanism because there are some business users and some BI users, so the licensing structure is not simple, but support is included."
"There are different types of licenses: enterprise or professional. The cost varies."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"​It is an expensive tool compared to other test automation tools. It has a lot of advantages over other tools."
"I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Retailer
6%
 

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 Enterprise24
Large Enterprise72
 

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.
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.
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...
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...
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.
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.