IBM Rational Test Workbench vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Rational Test Workbench
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (18th), API Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (36th)
Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (5th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the market share of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.2% and it decreased by 60.4% compared to the previous year. The market share of Selenium HQ is 0.6% and it decreased by 69.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
Unique Categories:
API Testing Tools
0.5%
Functional Testing Tools
4.1%
Regression Testing Tools
4.9%
 

Featured Reviews

JP
Mar 14, 2021
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.
MD
Apr 26, 2023
Helps with critical deployments and test automation of web
We use the solution for the test automation of web solutions. It also helps us to create web browsers.   My company uses the solution for critical deployments.  I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website.  I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"There are many useful features in Selenium that I like, and of the new features I particularly enjoy the Selenium Grid. With this, we can run many test cases in one go, and in one suite we can extract multiple results."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The solution is free to use."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies."
 

Cons

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"Coding skills are required to use Selenium, so it could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"Currently, Selenium HQ is free for customers."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"The solution is open source."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing 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%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
SeleniumHQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.