We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Zeenyx AscentialTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write."
"All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.