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

OpenText Silk Test vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
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
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.8%
OpenText Silk Test1.3%
Other92.9%
Test Automation 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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Lead at Emerson
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"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 scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
 

Cons

"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"The pricing could be improved."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"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 pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
 

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."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
5%
 

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 Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise32
 

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.
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.