CrossBrowserTesting vs HeadSpin comparison

Read 7 HeadSpin reviews

1,640 Views
1,050 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

CrossBrowserTesting and HeadSpin compete in testing solutions. CrossBrowserTesting is preferred for cost-effectiveness and support, while HeadSpin is noted for its extensive features.

Features: CrossBrowserTesting enables live browser testing, visual testing, and integrates with various tools. HeadSpin offers global device infrastructure, real-test environment capabilities, and advanced performance monitoring tools.

Room for Improvement: CrossBrowserTesting could improve in areas such as advanced performance tracking, global device availability, and seamless automation integration. HeadSpin can enhance user interface simplicity, reduce initial deployment complexity, and better cost transparency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: CrossBrowserTesting provides easy setup and responsive customer service facilitating quick implementation. HeadSpin, while providing strong support during deployment, requires more time and resources due to its complex features.

Pricing and ROI: CrossBrowserTesting is budget-friendly with a pay-as-you-go model, offering quick ROI for smaller projects. HeadSpin's higher initial investment reflects its extensive features, providing long-term value for enterprises aiming for comprehensive testing capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. HeadSpin Report (Updated: June 2026).

CrossBrowserTesting vs. HeadSpin

Download the complete report

Helped 902,894 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

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

29th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

HeadSpin

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

22nd

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile APM (7th), Mobile App Testing Tools (9th)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HeadSpin is 1.2%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
HeadSpin	1.2%
CrossBrowserTesting	1.4%
Other	97.4%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

CharlesNetshivhera

Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

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.…

Read full review

Harsh_Patel

Senior Software Engineer at Tech Mahindra Limited

Struggled with iOS and support yet have improved remote mobile testing and cost savings

There are several areas where HeadSpin can be improved. One major feature that is problematic for us is the iOS experience; we often receive complaints from our team that device interaction on iOS is very poor compared to Android, making it difficult to test on iOS devices. Additionally, when using tvOS, the Apple TV can only connect via LAN and not through Wi-Fi, which prevents multi-region testing for tvOS since mobile device support is required. Furthermore, devices connected to HeadSpin are constantly draining their batteries, necessitating continuous charging, which can be improved. The support team for HeadSpin might need to scale up in size because there are many customers signing up, and their support team is not able to keep pace. Whenever we try to contact them or file a complaint, the response often takes a while. If HeadSpin improves the iOS experience, tvOS experience, and customer support team performance, I would change my rating from three to four. HeadSpin could improve by obtaining various devices, as sometimes we need to check devices not available in our country, which clients may have. It would be helpful if they could provide us with a device upon request. There is room for improvement in customer support because response times are slow when we have outages or questions, so they could definitely enhance that area.

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

"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."

"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."

"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."

"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."

"The most valuable feature is that it gives us real OS devices that are available to test, and we don't have to ensure that all of the devices are up to date."

"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."

"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."

"We no longer need to have a full QA team, testing is more quickly and reliably reproduced, and scheduled daily tests assist in catching any bugs which fall through the cracks and make it to the production environment."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"Large companies and enterprises are using this product."

"The most valuable feature is that this is the first connected intelligence all-in-one platform."

"The most valuable features of the product are the performance parameters it gives us."

"The return on investment is definitely very high because earlier, we maintained various devices and a lot of QA staff, and with HeadSpin, we no longer have to invest in devices or as many people, which saves time and money."

"HeadSpin allowed us to manage remote work during Covid, enable continuous automation execution, and facilitate collaboration between various departments (product managers, developers, etc..)"

"The initial setup of HeadSpin was very easy and user-friendly, and it was easy to configure and write a script to achieve the desired outcome."

"It has an interesting feature called AV box testing. A lot of companies that are in the OTT segment don't really understand what their streaming is like. They can't test for streaming quality. There are restrictions where you cannot simulate live streaming. For example, on Netflix, you can't simulate how a movie is being streamed on a remote device. That's why HeadSpin has got this AV box testing feature. It is a patented feature. They send an AV box to your location, and you can test live streaming, which is something that no other company does."

"The most valuable feature of HeadSpin it's the integration with other solutions; it is great, and I can search for an element or do a quick debugging on the application right on HeadSpin, which is very useful."

More HeadSpin pros

Cons

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."

"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."

"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"Support and pricing could be improved."

"HeadSpin needs to improve the hardware. With the mobile, the battery life reduces and must be continuously charged."

"Sometimes, devices go offline and some features are not functioning on some devices, specifically on iOS."

"HeadSpin could improve on the user interface because it is very poor."

"HeadSpin could improve on the user interface because it is very poor. The checks that are done on the iOS devices are very difficult, but for Android, it runs great. For all iOS devices, the user interface and how it interacts with the device are very poor."

"If you want to do some testing or check the devices manually or check the application in a particular device manually, it is really laggy. That's a disappointment because sometimes we would like to do manual testing when our local devices are not available."

"There are several areas where HeadSpin can be improved. One major feature that is problematic for us is the iOS experience; we often receive complaints from our team that device interaction on iOS is very poor compared to Android, making it difficult to test on iOS devices."

"There is a great scope to improve professional services; the time to deploy is quite long, and while they can set up automation through scripts at this stage, they are very expensive."

More HeadSpin cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"We have a yearly license for 16 devices."

"It's not cheap, but there are a few different packages and different prices for enterprises with different product versions."

"It has a yearly license. There is no other option. It is expensive. There are a lot of other cheaper players in the market, but it is like a Mercedes. You pay an extra premium for it, but you get the benefits. I would love to see them come up with project-based costing. Companies that are low on funds or new-age can do with pricing that is easily digestible. They can give them a pricing model for three months. They can provide a startup package."

"I believe the licensing cost is cheap because it's a total solution, hardware, license and software."

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

902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Comms Service Provider

Transportation Company

Manufacturing Company

15%

Construction Company

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	10

No data available

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 15% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 7% of the time

Zeenyx AscentialTest vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 4% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Splunk AppDynamics vs HeadSpin

Compared 9% of the time

New Relic vs HeadSpin

Compared 9% of the time

Perfecto vs HeadSpin

Compared 7% of the time

BrowserStack vs HeadSpin

Compared 6% of the time

Dynatrace vs HeadSpin

Compared 5% of the time

More HeadSpin Competitors

Product Reports

CrossBrowserTesting

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Download HeadSpin product report

Overview

CrossBrowserTesting provides comprehensive live and automated testing across browsers and devices, helping teams ensure functionality and compatibility through features like record and replay, and real device access.

CrossBrowserTesting is a robust tool for quality assurance professionals focusing on cross-browser compatibility and feature validation across multiple devices and operating systems. It assists in detecting platform inconsistencies early by simulating interactions and allows for troubleshooting front-end defects. Whether conducting manual or automated testing via its Selenium portal and API, it proves invaluable for assessing JavaScript performance and resolving browser-specific issues in web and mobile applications. The service is appreciated for responsive support and adaptation to feature requests, though it seeks enhancements in load times and UI streamlining.

What are some key features of CrossBrowserTesting?

Live Testing: Conduct live tests to verify functionality across browsers and devices.
Screenshot Functionality: Quickly capture and share page results with team members.
Record and Replay: Enhance test automation capabilities with this functionality.
Real Device Access: Perform tests on real devices under actual conditions.
Updated TLS Settings: Run tests with the latest security configurations.

What benefits should users seek in CrossBrowserTesting reviews?

Responsiveness: Notice how support teams address user inquiries and feature needs.
Flexibility: Observe flexibility in adding requested features for seamless testing.
Device Diversity: Consider the range of browser and device combinations offered.

In industries like e-commerce and SaaS platforms, CrossBrowserTesting is instrumental in providing rigorous testing, allowing companies to enhance user experiences by identifying cross-platform issues. It supports ensuring that applications perform effectively across devices and browsers, which is vital for customer retention and satisfaction.

SmartBear

HeadSpin offers integrated performance testing with automation, providing an all-in-one platform to enhance app diagnostics and user experience across devices.

HeadSpin is an advanced tool for testing applications on Android and iOS, supporting automated, manual, and performance assessments. It enables quick debugging and integration with other tools for element searches. ERP report-based insights help management make strategic decisions. Users find its remote testing capabilities beneficial, reducing reliance on local devices, with options for cloud or on-premises deployment. However, there are feedback areas, such as improved code coverage reporting, better support and pricing for web applications, and addressing iOS interface issues. Hardware enhancements like mini-computers could improve performance, especially with tvOS Wi-Fi challenges during multi-region testing.

What are HeadSpin's key features?

Performance Parameters: Offers robust testing features for live streaming quality via the AV box.
Automation Integration: Seamlessly connects with automation suites to streamline workflows.
ERP Insights: Provides detailed report-based insights for informed management decisions.
User-Friendly Documentation: Comprehensive guides that support ease of use and efficient onboarding.
Remote Testing: Enables testing across multiple devices without relying on local physical devices.

What benefits should users expect?

Enhanced Debugging: Quick identification and resolution of app issues through effective testing.
Strategic Decision Making: Leverages detailed reporting to enhance management's strategic planning.
Flexibility: Offers both cloud and on-premises deployment options to suit different operational needs.
Reduced Infrastructure Costs: Diminishes dependence on physical testing devices, cutting expenses.

In industries such as telecom and tech, HeadSpin's remote device testing and real-life simulation capabilities improve app reliability and performance. Developers and QA teams benefit from its comprehensive diagnostics, allowing for efficient debugging and improved end-user experiences. Its flexible deployment offers enhanced adaptability across different environments, addressing diverse requirements effectively.

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

Zynga, Tinder, Pinterest, Akamai, Microsoft, Airbnb, Jam City, TMobile, Mozilla, CNN, Cognizant, Yahoo!, ebay, Quora, Walmart, Kohls, Telstra

CrossBrowserTesting vs. HeadSpin