Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Selenium HQ vs SmartBear TestComplete 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

Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.7%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.8%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Anil Kumar Shrestha - PeerSpot reviewer
An open-source solution that integrates with every programming language and library
What I like best about it is that it can automate everything on the front end with the help of other frameworks. The community worldwide provides support for any issues. Plus, it’s open-source, which is a big advantage. The solution integrates with every programming language and library and is very easy to use. It has a simple syntax, and the documentation on the website makes it straightforward to learn and implement.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"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."
"All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"Selenium WebDriver and Selenium IDE are useful."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
 

Cons

"One key area for improvement is the documentation."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"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."
"I continuously see failures in threads when it is running in parallel."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"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."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"It is free."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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 do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Selenium HQ vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.