No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BrowserStack vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 3.0%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.0%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BrowserStack3.0%
OpenText Silk Test2.0%
Other95.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Managing Technical Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing has accelerated releases and now needs smarter AI-driven test creation
The best features that BrowserStack offers include the ability to run manual and automated tests on real devices. We can create bugs, integrate it with other platforms like Jira or Azure, and use self-healing scripts with Selenium. We also have the test runs for different versions or with different frameworks, not just Selenium but with Playwright as well. Additionally, there are real-time dashboards and notifications sent when tests fail or when we need screenshots or recordings of test executions, and we can easily integrate this into our pipelines. BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by providing an out-of-the-box solution for whole test executions across different projects for our automobile customers. We have worked on around twenty to thirty projects, and the need for a stable, customizable single test execution platform that supports different platforms has been met. It has helped manage the entire quality assurance of the product efficiently. The measurable improvements due to BrowserStack include a significant efficiency gain, allowing the whole team to collaborate on testing and communicate faster. Also, the easier integration with project management tools has been beneficial. The documentation of findings has improved, which helps us share insights with different project stakeholders.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by ensuring that we don't have any surprises, especially on smaller devices."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"The BrowserStack interface is easy to use and the webinar has a lot of information."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"For BrowserStack, it's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"Hats off to their Customer Service."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"BrowserStack positively impacts my organization by saving time in the QA testing process and clarifying the mission, which is important."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting, as you get a single frame of reporting across all the various tests and the program is very user-friendly."
"The statistics that are available are very good, the solution offers very good detailed reports, and it's excellent for testing an application's performance levels."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The OCR recognition is great, way over Sikulix or Robot Framework."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"It drastically reduced our manual regression efforts that is difficult to achieve in Agile model."
"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."
 

Cons

"I think a possible improvement for BrowserStack could be adding features such as sending SMS or making FaceTime calls because, as far as I know, those features are not available at the moment."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"BrowserStack does not support file upload for automation - the WebDriver used to run tests on mobile devices (real iOS devices in beta (Appium), iOS simulators (iPhoneDriver) and Android emulators (AndroidDriver)) do not support this feature."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure it was properly mimicking the browsers or not."
"We had some execution issues."
"The solution is slow."
"Sometimes connectivity can be a problem. We will be in the middle of testing and we will lose connectivity sometimes."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."
"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."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."
"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."
"The pricing could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"The price is fine."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
Improvements for BrowserStack could include better usability when working under a private network or a VPN, since it can be challenging to access restricted URLs. There are times when running an au...
What is your primary use case for BrowserStack?
In the start of my career, I performed functional testing on mobile devices and web applications, and I used BrowserStack for testing web applications and mobile applications for one year. My main ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.