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.
NK
DevOps Lead at Illumifin India LLP
Automation revolutionizes testing efficiency and cost savings while ensuring smooth deployment
The challenges I faced while integrating Selenium HQ into my existing systems relate to historical data, which requires going back six years. I have to traverse if there were any challenges because I am sure if there were any, they must have been documented in our ALM documents. The multi-browser support of Selenium HQ impacts my testing process primarily since it is being used in Edge and Chrome browsers. It all depends on our customers. I haven't heard of any challenges with other browsers such as Opera or Mozilla Firefox, as these two browsers are what we primarily use. When we were doing these tests manually, it took several hours of effort, and those hours, when counted on the basis of person days, used to be maybe six or seven months of effort, which we can now do every day by running the pipeline. This has definitely saved a lot of money for us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is the best tool I have used till today as it allows us to handle automation in variety of ways."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"The solution is scalable."
"I can organize test scripts pretty well."
"This product can facilitate the lowering of test execution times for operational people, as the bulk of the repeating test steps can be taken away by automating the EBS regression set in OpenScript every release."
"This tool did a much better job recording the http requests during web load testing than other open source tools."
"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.."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"I like the record and playback features, and we also appreciate that while we were browsing our web application, it automatically records all the clicks and movements of points and provides screenshots of everything in the output."
"Selenium web driver - Java."
"What I like the most is that it is fast, and when comparing, it is faster than HQ QTP and supports multiple processes, which is great."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"The stability and performance are good."
"An engineer from any background can learn and build automation easily."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"We gained like seven seconds after moving to Selenium."
 

Cons

"It does not provide easy diagnostics to ascertain end to end transaction monitoring."
"We have stability issues with the server logging off when a script runs from OTM."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"The test installation pretty much destroyed my computer’s laptop performance."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"The tool runs out of memory when the recording flows are long and involve many screens despite increasing the memory settings for OpenScript."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing."
"It needs more support for mobile devices and also on testing web services."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"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."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"I observed like batch execution issues and comparability issues like AngularJS app's etc."
"The IDE portion is useful for doing quick recordings of steps, but the resulting scripts are extremely fragile."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"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."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"It is free."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,932 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: April 2026.
886,932 professionals have used our research since 2012.