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

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting 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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.2%, down from 11.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BrowserStack10.2%
CrossBrowserTesting0.9%
Other88.9%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users
I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
CN
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"The device farm is one of the positive impacts we have seen from using BrowserStack."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"It was the perfect solution that saved us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices, which allowed our team to correct multiple failures in devices."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
 

Cons

"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"The price is fine."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.