Bitbar vs BrowserStack comparison

SmartBear and BrowserStack are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #26, while BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3. SmartBear holds a 0.7% mindshare in FT, compared to BrowserStack’s 10.4% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of BrowserStack users who would recommend it.

Bitbar

Read 3 Bitbar reviews

777 Views
542 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Bitbar

BrowserStack

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

BrowserStack and Bitbar compete in the mobile and web application testing category. BrowserStack holds the upper hand in comprehensive test capabilities, while Bitbar is recognized for flexibility and cost-effectiveness.

Features: BrowserStack offers extensive OS and browser support with instant real device access, broadening test coverage. Its cloud-based infrastructure provides a user-friendly interface. Bitbar's open-source flexibility allows custom test executions, supporting deeper integration for dev teams. It also supports both cloud and on-premises options, providing adaptable solutions.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack simplifies integration and setup with its cloud-based deployment, and provides responsive customer service streamlining onboarding. Bitbar, offering cloud and on-premises options, suits diverse needs with more initial configuration. Its customer service is recognized for technical expertise, offering strong support for tailored solutions.

Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack has higher upfront costs, but its robust infrastructure often delivers high ROI through reduced testing times and efficiency. Bitbar offers competitive pricing models, presenting compelling value for companies using its open-source framework.

To learn more, read our detailed Bitbar vs. BrowserStack Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. BrowserStack

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 844,944 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Bitbar

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

26th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Platforms (12th)

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 0.7%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

it_user1267398

Senior Automation Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Has the ability to use different frameworks for testing although it is lacking in capability options

Setup depends on how you are using the product. In our case, it was quite simple. We did it ourselves and it didn't take much time, maybe a day. We used one person per team for setup, usually an engineer or developer. For each team, we had one person to assist with deployment. We have multiple teams so each team had someone dealing with setup. We now have two people working in the company who deal with the maintenance of the solution.

Read full review

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ability to use different frameworks."

"Game testing and the API for apps are good."

"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."

"Maintenance of the solution is easy."

"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."

"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."

"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."

"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."

More BrowserStack pros

Cons

"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."

"We are struggling to do local testing."

"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."

"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."

"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."

"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."

"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."

More BrowserStack cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"The price is fine."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Comms Service Provider

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

See all answers

Comparisons

Sauce Labs vs Bitbar

Compared 44% of the time

More Bitbar Competitors

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 34% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 19% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs BrowserStack

Compared 2% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Mobile App Platforms

March 2025

Download Bitbar product report

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

March 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Also Known As

Testdroid

No data available

Overview

Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.

SmartBear

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. BrowserStack

February 2025

Free Report: Bitbar vs. BrowserStack

Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. BrowserStack and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Bitbar vs. BrowserStack report.

See our list of best Functional 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.