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
25th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th), Load Testing Tools (13th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.6%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ3.6%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.6%
Other94.8%
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

"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"This tool did a much better job recording the http requests during web load testing than other open source tools."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature, the recording feature is the prime feature that open script has, and I also like the connectivity with Oracle Forms as it is very compatible."
"It has allowed more thorough testing with performance-based testing, in addition to regression testing and regular testing with each software release."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"This is the best tool I have used till today as it allows us to handle automation in variety of ways."
"Implementation of Oracle Application Testing Suite package has increased the overall efficiency."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"I do recommend Selenium HQ to other organizations because we are in a business that is primarily based on B2B interface."
"Selenium WebDriver and Selenium IDE are useful."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"The product is easy to use and the pricing is great."
"Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
 

Cons

"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"Improvements can be made in a number of protocol support areas, including enhanced Citrix support."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"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."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"There is no technical support available for Selenium, as it is an open-source product."
"Both of those are easier solutions than Selenium but also quite expensive."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"I would suggest cross-browser support need to be improved, as all methods do not support when we change the browser."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"The product is open-source and free."
"Selenium is open-source."
"Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"It is all free."
"It is an open-source tool."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,174 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
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 Enterprise51
 

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: March 2026.
886,174 professionals have used our research since 2012.