BrowserStack vs Panaya Test Dynamix comparison

BrowserStack and Panaya are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3, while Panaya is ranked #27. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Panaya’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Panaya users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Panaya Test Dynamix

Read 4 Panaya Test Dynamix reviews

787 Views
427 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Panaya Test Dynamix

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

BrowserStack and Panaya Test Dynamix are competing in the software testing domain. BrowserStack has the upper hand in cross-browser testing with its real device cloud, while Panaya Test Dynamix shines with test management and analysis features.

Features: BrowserStack offers extensive real device and browser testing, robust automation capabilities, and integration with popular development tools. Panaya Test Dynamix provides advanced impact assessment, risk-based testing analysis, and comprehensive test management features.

Room for Improvement: BrowserStack could enhance its reporting capabilities, provide better integration with more development environments, and expand its debugging options. Panaya Test Dynamix could benefit from simplifying its interface, improving deployment speed, and reducing complexity in initial setup.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack offers a fast and straightforward cloud-based deployment and responsive customer support. Panaya Test Dynamix provides detailed on-premise or cloud deployment options with dedicated, tailored customer service that assists with complex configurations.

Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack is cost-effective with various scalable pricing plans offering significant ROI through reduced test times and enhanced debugging. Panaya Test Dynamix, while having higher setup costs, provides excellent ROI by simplifying complex test processes and minimizing software release risks.

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

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Panaya Test Dynamix

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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

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)

Panaya Test Dynamix

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

27th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Defect Tracking (6th), Test Management Tools (20th), Regression Testing Tools (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Panaya Test Dynamix is 1.2%, up from 0.7% 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

Alain Vanhaeght

IT Project leader at a construction company with 10,001+ employees

More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options

For the moment we are looking to automated testing, and there today apparently it is not working well with the application we want to test. So we are using an application on a terminal server and some quirks make it challenging to make automatic testing. It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we again have a network connection.

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

"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."

"I like that it offers full device capability."

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

"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."

"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."

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

"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."

"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."

More BrowserStack pros

"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."

"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."

"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."

"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."

"The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."

Cons

"The solution is slow."

"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."

"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."

"We are struggling to do local testing."

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

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

"There is room for improvement in pricing."

"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."

More BrowserStack cons

"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."

"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."

"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."

"Support is reactive and in English only."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"The price is fine."

"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."

"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."

"It is expensive. Because of its cost, we couldn't deploy Panaya to a large extent. Its licensing should be improved, and there should be more license types. There should be an advanced license and a basic license."

"The solution is rather expensive due to the security it has to offer."

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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

22%

Computer Software Company

16%

Retailer

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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

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

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 69% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 13% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 8% of the time

More Panaya Test Dynamix Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

April 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

March 2025

Download Panaya Test Dynamix product report

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.

BrowserStack

Panaya Test Dynamix makes it easy for large enterprises to test smarter and release faster, by gaining control and visibility of every aspect of their ERP testing wherever they are.

With SAP ERP testing holding unique challenges, Test Dynamix offers provides all test management and execution capabilities in a single place , with a business process-centered approach designed specifically for SAP and Oracle testing, risk-based testing and test automation, to ensure the most efficient and effective large-scale testing possible.

Panaya

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

Over 3000 leading enterprises worldwide including SONY, NICE, NEC, Shiseido, DHL, ABB and Grupo Bimbo

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Panaya Test Dynamix

February 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. Panaya Test Dynamix

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. Panaya Test Dynamix report.

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.