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

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
3rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (3rd)
OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 7.8%, down from 9.1% 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
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing7.8%
OpenText Silk Test2.0%
Other90.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.
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

"Since I started, we invested in UFT and automation and we have significantly reduced our release cycle time."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy and straightforward."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"We have performed 3500 test case automations, and we are able to execute them in just five days, whereas if we were to do this manually, it would take 30 days."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"For test automation, it helps to speed up the testing and to speed up the software delivery, especially for HPE UFT because you have lots of test automation tools."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"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."
"With the help of SilkTest we've automated a bunch of routine regression tests, thus we saved our testing team weeks of testing time."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"Not many performance Testing tool provides end to end response times for scripts running on the page, this tool is capable of providing end to end real time browser response times."
"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 Silk4J feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"It speeds up testing efforts."
"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."
 

Cons

"I’d like to see them improve the number of objects recognized without customization, similar to TestComplete by SmartBear."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"The solution works for the most part, but the IDE is horrible (although I hear version 12 has a revamped IDE and is much better) and as a result of VBScript being the language, there is no stack trace information available so debugging some errors is not an easy task."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"In my opinion, the improvement of the object recognition of new technologies and the capacity to catch more performance info should be desirable."
"When a debug session ends, UFT forces the user back to the main script. 90% of code development and issues occur in function libraries."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"At the moment, when we are trying to use this tool, we are finding quite a few compatibility issues between the tool and the applications on the test. We wouldn't consider it perfectly stable for that reason."
"SilkTest has to improve on Firefox and Chrome as their versions change."
"The pricing could be improved."
"I've seen a lot of potential users upset with the SilkTest due to broken installation."
"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."
"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
"The price is reasonable."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user69066 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Expert at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Nov 11, 2013
QTP vs SilkTest WorkBench
The last few months, I've been working with the Silk Tools (particularly the WorkBench .NET variant IDE) and I must say that I like what I've been using. The libraries provided by Silk are quite good for your typical automation and when you run into custom applications, the .NET IDE (which is…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
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.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. OpenText Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.