Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BrowserStack vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 11.4%, up from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.6%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
LokeshYadav - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation
I've also worked with Micro Focus. I'm working with Micro Focus, however, for that part, I'm working on the mainframe - although I've done some web testing using Micro Focus on a website. Otherwise, I found Selenium to be easier, and simpler to use than Micro Focus when it comes to the web. A lot of support online is available. A lot of forums, and communities are there. For Micro Focus, the part where you identify objects on a webpage, that part is pretty simple on Selenium. You can use XPath or CSS or IDE or anything, and it works fine. Yet with Micro Focus, the web part, I found it a little tedious to work with. Selenium is much easier in that sense on the web part.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a scalable solution."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"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."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"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."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages."
"The solution is very easy to implement."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"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."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
 

Cons

"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"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."
"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."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"The solution is slow."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"There are stability issues with Internet Explorer only."
"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."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"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."
"Coding skills are required to use Selenium, so it could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"The price is fine."
"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."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"It is free to use."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"Selenium is open-source."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"It is an open-source tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

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.
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.
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.
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
As an open-source tool, Selenium does not have direct costs, but coding can be money-intensive because it is challenging.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.