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

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs Selenium HQ comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
28th
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 October 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.3% 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

"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"The best feature of this and Load Test is simplicity."
"It's user friendly and in-built API support makes it very easy to automate or develop an automation framework."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"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."
"Implementation of Oracle Application Testing Suite package has increased the overall efficiency."
"They are working on a new product which gives you an opportunity to test your product with different browsers at the same time."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are that it is free and allows using any programming language."
"The stability and performance are good."
"If working on multiple browsers and on multiple platforms is the goal, then Selenium is definitely the right tool because it works on Windows as well as on Linux and also supports multiple browsers."
"The best part of Selenium WebDriver is that it supports multiple web browsers, thus, helping in cross-browser testing."
"Without WebDriver and Grid, the sheer size of team/software license required to accomplish this humongous task would have thrown us out of business."
 

Cons

"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"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."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"The tool runs out of memory when the recording flows are long and involve many screens despite increasing the memory settings for OpenScript."
"OTM Test Report – We needed to develop custom reports as there is less flexibility."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"Dynamic debugging needs to be improved. Like QTP, there should be an option to run the test from a point or state of application."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"Some improvements can be implemented as compared to Playwright, which is why I rate it seven out of ten."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"Selenium IDE needs to be improved not like just a record / play back tool, but as an effective web elements spy."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google."
"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"It is all free."
"Currently, Selenium HQ is free for customers."
"The solution is open source."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"The pricing is open source."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,938 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

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: September 2026.
914,938 professionals have used our research since 2012.