OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test

Download the complete report

Helped 908,834 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 Functional Testing...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

6th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

7th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Silk Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

19th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

18th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (9th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.5%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.0%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers	3.5%
OpenText Silk Test	2.0%
Other	94.5%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities

OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.

Read full review

Jose Alfredo Garcia

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.

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 Java and .NET programmers have said that "This tool is really good; we don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play, and it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us.""

"Once we upgraded to UFT Pro, it was an easy adoption, even though it's a commercial product, and it supports our approach in agile and DevOps deliveries really well."

"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."

"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."

"The most important thing about LeanFT is that it gives us the opportunity to introduce developer testing."

"Every single feature on offer is valuable and useful."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

"Using this DLL functionality we were able to automate our product."

"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."

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

"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."

"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 solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."

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

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test pros

Cons

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

"There are still some stability issues."

"The issue with all the integration is that it can become very costly and expensive and we'd like to be able to recommend one single tool that will do it all."

"Technical support was not very good. We do reach out, but often they're unable to help."

"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."

"If someone is starting right from the beginning, I would not recommend they go with UFT."

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

"In the next release I'd like to see HP enable LeanFT to work with Sauce Labs."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

"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."

"The browser based testing needs to be improved."

"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."

"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."

"The pricing could be improved."

"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."

"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."

More OpenText Silk Test cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers 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."

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

908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Construction Company

11%

Outsourcing Company

Financial Services Firm

15%

Construction Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	12
Large Enterprise	30

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	10

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...

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 needs improvement with Silk Test?

The pricing could be improved.

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.

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Comparisons

Compared 7% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 6% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 6% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 6% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 11% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 8% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 6% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 5% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

OpenText Silk Test

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.

This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?

Complex Algorithm Handling: Manages complex scenarios with ease, including fuzzy logic.
Developer-friendly: Enables coding in C# and Java, integrating seamlessly with popular IDEs.
AI-based Object Recognition: Enhances test automation through advanced object identification.
Extensive Protocol Support: Supports a wide range of protocols for diverse testing requirements.
Seamless Integration: Connects effortlessly with ALM and Jenkins, promoting continuous development.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Functional Testing?

Efficient Test Automation: Streamlines test processes, optimizing resource allocation and reducing effort.
Multi-platform Flexibility: Facilitates cross-platform testing, accommodating desktop, web, and banking applications.
Reduced IT Workload: Simplifies automation tasks, decreasing the strain on IT resources.
Enhanced DevOps Support: Integrates well with DevOps practices for continuous testing advancements.

Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.

OpenText

OpenText Silk Test is a versatile automated testing tool known for its advanced scripting and recording capabilities in Visual Studio. It offers robust test case management, supporting cross-browser testing and seamless integration with Java and C#, providing a stable environment for automation.

OpenText Silk Test supports GUI object recognition and offers a user-friendly interface that facilitates multi-language support. It enhances test design with its object-oriented approach and integrates performance testing tools for precise data-driven tests. Silk Test excels in browser testing and performance testing across web applications, making it a comprehensive choice for regression testing, SAP automation, and performance analysis.

What are the key features of OpenText Silk Test?

Scripting and Recording Capabilities: Integrates with Visual Studio for efficient script creation.
Cross-Browser Testing: Supports multiple browsers ensuring comprehensive coverage.
GUI Object Recognition: Enhances automation accuracy with reliable object identification.
Multi-Language Support: Facilitates diverse testing environments.
Robust Reporting: Detailed insights into testing processes and outcomes.
SAP Testing Functionality: Optimizes SAP project performance.

What benefits can users expect from OpenText Silk Test?

Enhanced Test Efficiency: Streamlines automation processes for faster results.
Comprehensive Test Management: Manages test cases systematically for improved organization.
Improved Accuracy in Automation: Reduces errors with precise object recognition.
Scalability: Adapts to different project sizes and complexities.
Performance Testing Integration: Identifies and resolves bottlenecks efficiently.

OpenText Silk Test is widely implemented in industries requiring high precision in data handling and performance analysis. It is commonly used in financial services for month-end regression testing and SAP projects for effective automation. Manual, functional, and performance testing in ERP systems further showcases its diverse application in complex business environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

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

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. OpenText Silk Test