BrowserStack vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

BrowserStack and Progress Software are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3, while Progress Software is ranked #24. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Progress Software’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

1,024 Views
655 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

BrowserStack and Telerik Test Studio are competing products within the software testing landscape. BrowserStack offers more accessible pricing and comprehensive support, positioning it favorably for cost-effectiveness and customer service, while Telerik Test Studio's robust feature set appeals to those seeking a comprehensive toolset that justifies a higher investment.

Features: BrowserStack provides a real device cloud, compatibility testing across platforms and browsers, and extensive cross-browser support. Telerik Test Studio offers end-to-end automation capabilities, scriptless testing, and seamless integration, making it well-suited for complex testing scenarios.

Room for Improvement: BrowserStack could enhance its integration process and expand features for specific testing scenarios. Telerik Test Studio might benefit from a simplified deployment model and better ease of use for first-time users. Both products could improve support for additional platforms and devices.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack offers a straightforward cloud-based deployment that simplifies setup and access, supported by responsive customer service. Telerik Test Studio's on-premise options make deployment more complex, but it is balanced by robust customer support channels.

Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack is generally seen as having a lower initial setup cost, attracting budget-conscious buyers with a favorable ROI for speed and flexibility. Telerik Test Studio requires a higher upfront investment but delivers considerable ROI through its extensive features for long-term testing benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

24th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (25th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.1%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

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.

Read full review

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."

"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."

"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."

"I like that it offers full device capability."

"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."

"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."

"It is a scalable solution."

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

More BrowserStack pros

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"The way it identifies elements is good."

Cons

"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."

"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."

"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."

"The solution is slow."

"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."

"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."

More BrowserStack cons

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"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."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"The price is fine."

"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."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Government

11%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 33% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack

Compared 5% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 4% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 38% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 17% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 13% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 7% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

April 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Overview

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio

April 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.