BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting comparison

BrowserStack and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.9, while SmartBear is ranked #27. BrowserStack holds a 11.2% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

7,141 Views
5,904 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

797 Views
634 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

CrossBrowserTesting

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

BrowserStack and CrossBrowserTesting are competitors in the cross-browser testing space. BrowserStack seems to have an edge with higher user-reported satisfaction owing to its comprehensive feature set and perceived value, while CrossBrowserTesting appeals to budget-focused users with its competitive pricing.

Features: BrowserStack offers live testing across various browsers and devices, automated Selenium testing, and integration with developer tools. CrossBrowserTesting distinguishes itself with local testing capabilities, advanced screenshot comparisons, and session replay features.

Room for Improvement: BrowserStack could enhance its pricing model to attract more budget-conscious users, improve its feature discovery during trial periods, and offer more free credits for trial users. CrossBrowserTesting could benefit from improving its screenshot accuracy, enhancing its integration with more development tools, and increasing platform stability under high loads.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack is praised for its quick deployment and efficient customer support, facilitating smooth operations. CrossBrowserTesting offers a straightforward deployment and reliable support, though BrowserStack is often seen as faster.

Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack’s pricing is considered premium, justified by its extensive features, leading to high ROI if fully utilized. CrossBrowserTesting presents a more economical option, which appeals to those with tighter budgets but may result in varying ROI when compared purely on feature depth.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

27th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 11.2%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.9%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Michael Hutchison

Web Specialist at Mayo Clinic

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

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

"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."

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

"Maintenance of the solution is easy."

"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."

"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."

"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."

"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

"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."

"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."

"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."

"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."

"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."

"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."

"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."

"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

Cons

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

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."

"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."

"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."

"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."

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

"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."

More BrowserStack cons

"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is fine."

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

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

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

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"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."

"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."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

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

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

26%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

10%

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 28% of the time

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 28% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack

Compared 5% of the time

Selenium HQ vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 20% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 13% of the time

Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 11% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

December 2024

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

December 2024

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Learn More

BrowserStack

SmartBear

Overview

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.

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting

November 2024

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting 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.