Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs OpenText Silk Central comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
11th
Ranking in Test Design Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (8th)
OpenText Silk Central
Ranking in Test Management Tools
21st
Ranking in Test Design Automation
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Test Management Tools category, the market share of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 2.9% and it increased by 1273.1% compared to the previous year. The market share of OpenText Silk Central is 2.9% and it increased by 96.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
Unique Categories:
Application Requirements Management
0.2%
 

Featured Reviews

MH
May 11, 2023
Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support
We are using Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer for DevOps. For example,  you might draw the diagram within Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and it will turn these requirements into test cases automatically before you build the code. It all can be done with ease The most valuable features…
it_user685080 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 2, 2019
A powerful platform and strong technical support help us to make the right decisions
We are primarily interested in improving the flexibility to customize parts of the tool. At this point, we feel that the customization is bad. For example, we would like to be able to automatize internal projects. We would like like to see the visibility improved, and want to perform certain tests faster. We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end. This is very important to us. In terms of usability and the interface, a few small improvements can lead to a lot of benefits. The interface is good but can be improved. The section on managing requirements for testing has to be improved. This is an old feature that has not been updated at the same rate as the rest of the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."
"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that."
"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
"The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage."
"Measuring test coverage helps in one of the most challenging tasks. It has logic that can help to select the right set of scenarios and know what coverage it will provide."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
 

Cons

"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."
"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."
"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
"​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
"The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Energy/Utilities Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.
What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
Micro Focus Silk Central, Borland Silk Central, Silk Central
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Williams, Rabobank
AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.