Compare Selenium HQ vs. Silk Test

Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Silk Test is ranked 17th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.2, while Silk Test is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "An open-source tool that's flexible and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Test writes "An easy to use interface with a recording feature that our business users are happy with". Selenium HQ is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Eggplant Functional and Telerik Test Studio, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, LoadRunner and Selenium HQ. See our Selenium HQ vs. Silk Test report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Selenium HQ Logo
16,643 views|13,472 comparisons
Silk Test Logo
5,215 views|3,670 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Selenium HQ vs. Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
391,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel.The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer.The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing.The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment took about seven months.You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution.The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud.Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run.Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only.

Read more »

The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities.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.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers.The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing.The solution's UI path needs to be modernized.Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear.The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem.It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background.In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues.Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%.

Read more »

The support for automation with iOS applications can be better.The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve.They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
391,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
5th
Views
16,643
Comparisons
13,472
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
342
Avg. Rating
8.3
17th
Views
5,215
Comparisons
3,670
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
626
Avg. Rating
7.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Also Known As
SeleniumHQSegue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Learn
SeleniumHQ
Video Not Available
Micro Focus
Overview

Selenium HQ is a suite of tools to automate web browsers across many platforms. Selenium runs in many browsers and operating systems and can be controlled by many programming languages and testing frameworks. Selenium consist of two types:

  1. Selenium WebDriver - create robust, browser-based regression automation suites & tests and scale & distribute scripts across many environments.
  2. Selenium IDE - create quick bug reproduction scripts and create scripts to aid in automation-aided exploratory testing.
SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.
Offer
Learn more about Selenium HQ
Learn more about Silk Test
Sample Customers
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear SoftwareKrung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, MÂȘller, AVG Technologies
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Retailer21%
Financial Services Firm21%
Comms Service Provider11%
Manufacturing Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company27%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm14%
Manufacturing Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company41%
Comms Service Provider14%
Insurance Company13%
Transportation Company5%
Find out what your peers are saying about Selenium HQ vs. Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
391,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.