Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Silk Test Logo
4,757 views|2,937 comparisons
Testim Logo
198 views|122 comparisons
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Silk Test vs. Testim and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
535,015 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 statistics that are available are very good.""The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to.""The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities.""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."

More Silk Test Pros »

"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests.""The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved.""The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios.""The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."

More Testim Pros »

Cons
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are.""The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies.""The support for automation with iOS applications can be better.""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 Silk Test Cons »

"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved.""There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements.""The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind.""The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."

More Testim Cons »

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."

More Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
535,015 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: 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.
Top Answer: We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee.
Top Answer: 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… more »
Top Answer: The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers.
Top Answer: I'd advise users to take advantage of the Implementation meetings, monthly discussions, and pro licensing.
Top Answer: The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level. Some lists have values that are returned in different orders… more »
Ranking
17th
Views
4,757
Comparisons
2,937
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
783
Rating
7.0
18th
Views
198
Comparisons
122
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
427
Rating
10.0
Comparisons
Also Known As
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Learn More
Overview
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.

Testim is an end-to-end agile testing automation solution which utilizes machine learning for test authoring, execution, and maintenance. Users can create tests in minutes, run thousands of tests in parallel across different browsers, integrate with their existing CI/CD and collaboration tools, and more.

Offer
Learn more about Silk Test
Learn more about Testim
Sample Customers
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm13%
Government5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Healthcare Company31%
Comms Service Provider17%
Educational Organization4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise57%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Silk Test vs. Testim and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
535,015 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Silk Test is ranked 17th in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Testim is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews. Silk Test is rated 7.0, while Testim is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Silk Test writes "An easy to use interface with a recording feature that our business users are happy with". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Testim writes "Great REST API features, good technical support, and makes it easy to onboard new testers". Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Testim is most compared with Functionize, TestProject and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Silk Test vs. Testim report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

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.