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
27th
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
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.3% 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

"Now I feel its the best tool to automate any of the Oracle Products, which include Oracle EBS Applications, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel, Adobe Flex, ADF applications, etc.."
"This tool did a much better job recording the http requests during web load testing than other open source tools."
"I can organize test scripts pretty well."
"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."
"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"OATS provides the functionality to institute a corporate-wide standardized method and approach for all types of application testing."
"Implementation of Oracle Application Testing Suite package has increased the overall efficiency."
"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."
"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 solution is very easy to use; once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple, with a great user-friendly interface, good support, fine pricing, very good configuration handling, solid stability, easy setup and deployment, and the ability to scale, plus a free community edition."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"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."
"Selenium has improved the way we work because if you do what we need to do manually, you'll have to expend a lot of time."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
 

Cons

"Performance is slow as compared to other tools like QTP."
"WebForms works fine, but scripting in the EBS forms option isn't very consistent and stable."
"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."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"There is one piece of functionality that is currently not offered and would be very good to have: Support for Digital Certificates authentication and Single Sign-On (SSO)."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
"Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex."
"Sometimes we face challenges with Selenium HQ. There are third party tools that we use, for example for reading the images, that are not easy to plug in. The third party add-ons are difficult to get good configuration and do not have good support. I would like to see better integration with other products."
"Selenium only supports web based applications and it is not suitable for testing small sized products which can be easily tested manually."
"I would like to see a better method handling. I mean methods/properties like Displayed, which should return false when there is no such element on the page instead NoSuchElementException, which has to be handled in my code – it should be provided with Selenium."
"To some extent it is unstable while executing against different versions of IE browser, but that could be overcome through some work-around and framework design."
"The latest versions are often unstable."
"Currently WebDriver is having issues running against the latest of Firefox."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"It's open-source, so it's free."
"We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything."
"I have been using the open-source version."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
921,749 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
11%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

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: October 2026.
921,749 professionals have used our research since 2012.