No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs Selenium HQ 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

Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (17th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.5%
Other94.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Manager consultant - Digital assurance Services at adrosonic
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, Oracle Application Testing Suite is very easy to use and you can create a good framework for developing and testing."
"It helped in running performance testing cycles and identifying the bottlenecks of the application, helping our clients to run their application successfully and smoothly."
"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"This is the best tool I have used till today as it allows us to handle automation in variety of ways."
"My advice to others is if they are using any Oracle Cloud Fusion-based or on-premise-based application, this is a good solution to use."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"OATS provides the functionality to institute a corporate-wide standardized method and approach for all types of application testing."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"The framework for testing is robust with Selenium, the integration with TestNG and Gherkin with Cucumber is great, and there is a supportive community around it."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves; I think it's perfect, as it's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"The data collection and sorting is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"There is nothing I cannot do with Selenium."
 

Cons

"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"WebForms works fine, but scripting in the EBS forms option isn't very consistent and stable."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"There are certain bugs which were present but was cleared in subsequent releases of application, but still there is room for improvement in the Functionality testing tool when automating form-based applications."
"I think that licensing policies could be more intuitive; when we installed this application for the first time, we couldn't understand why there were only two users."
"OTM Test Report – We needed to develop custom reports as there is less flexibility."
"I would rate their technical support 2.5 out of ten."
"There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"In the future, Selenium should be able to automate desktop-based applications, as it is not currently able to handle non-web-based, Windows-based applications."
"Stability has been a problem during my testing. I have run the same code several times and faced issues for no apparent reason."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"Maybe more stable cross-browser autotesting (sometimes a test which works ok for one browser fails in another)."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"The pricing is open source."
"The solution is open source."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
910,479 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise52
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
What needs improvement with Selenium HQ?
Some improvements can be implemented as compared to Playwright, which is why I rate it seven out of ten.
 

Also Known As

OATS
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,479 professionals have used our research since 2012.