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

CrossBrowserTesting vs Worksoft Certify comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Worksoft Certify
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.9%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Worksoft Certify is 5.4%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Michael Hutchison - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Shailesh-Parkhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful automation tool with a user-friendly interface, codeless automation, and adaptability to complex business processes, particularly in SAP environments
The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers. Even during the initial learning phase, I found it remarkably user-friendly. It facilitates quick onboarding and training of new resources. It offers features for building automation scripts, such as search and certify capture. A notable advantage is that it doesn't rely on other tools like Micro Focus UFT or Micro Focus ALM for script execution. Worksoft can run independently without the need for support from Microsoft Office, although the option to use it for maintaining data exists. The tool also includes debugging features and comprehensive reporting capabilities, generating PDF reports for easy analysis.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"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."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"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."
"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"It is a lot easier to maintain test scripts on Worksoft Certify than on other testing tools that we have had in the past."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"During our yearly upgrades, we have now gotten them down to ten days or less. We have Worksoft run all our integration tests, where it used to take probably six weeks to do that manually."
"The easy of use and ease of integration of Worksoft Certify are very good."
"Provides all the in-built functionalities and is a wonderful tool."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automate quickly and to maintain and update scripts."
 

Cons

"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"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."
"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."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"The stability needs help. This is main thing that needs help, and if it's not the stability, then it's Worksoft's ability to respond to issues."
"We can use it for the web application, but we are facing stability-related challenges. The properties are getting changed. For example, when I am performing any operation on the text box but the development team has done some changes, our Worksoft scripts are getting changed. This is the main challenge that we are facing while developing tests for the web application in Worksoft Certify, where any changes in the backend are indirectly impacting our scripts. For the web application, there is a scarcity of resources. Unlike an SAP application that doesn't require much experience, for the web application, you require experienced people."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"They have a scheduler in Execution Manager, but it is not customizable. Its UI needs a lot of improvement. The lights-out testing is a bit difficult with that particular tool, and it needs a lot of improvement. Of course, there are so many integration options with Worksoft for execution, but when it comes to Execution Manager, which is their own tool, there is a lot of scope for improvement."
"In the past, when we've tried to automate some of our web apps, it has not been as robust. If there were one thing that could be improved, it's interaction with web applications. The issue we were running into is that it was harder to identify the objects than it is with some of the other architectured applications."
"Some features are missing from a testing perspective. You need to know how to connect everything to create requirements and stability metrics for the routine."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"We have had run ins with some bugs on Business Process Procedure (BPP) and Execution Manager."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"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."
"It saves us time: approximately 50 percent."
"I'm not aware of any licensing costs for Worksoft Certify."
"The initial investment is probably a little high. It was a little hard for me to sell, but it was a one-shot deal and that's why it's so high. All we are doing now is paying annual maintenance, which we don't have to do if we don't want upgrades, but we do."
"The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP."
"We have an annual license for this solution. The product is very expensive."
"Cost-wise, compared with other tools, it is a great product."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"Worksoft Capture 2.0 can help our customers to accelerate their automation development at least 40 percent faster than any other commercial tools available in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
28%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
10%
Educational Organization
6%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Worksoft Certify?
A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.