No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CrossBrowserTesting vs Selenium HQ comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
CrossBrowserTesting1.3%
Other94.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
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.…
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Manager consultant - Digital assurance Services at adrosonic
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"CrossBrowserTesting helps a lot with the responsive testing in different mobiles and browsers and has good tools for our testing like taking videos and screenshots."
"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."
"Due to serious testing needs across platforms and devices, we found CrossBrowserTesting a useful tool as it has the capability for functional testing, UI testing, automated testing just on few clicks."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."
"Overall, this solution has proved useful to our organization, and with future improvements and the hopeful addition of devices, it will continue to be a tool we use daily."
"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are that it is free and allows using any programming language."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"I do recommend Selenium HQ to other organizations because we are in a business that is primarily based on B2B interface."
"If you have the right people on hand, it works very, very well."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good."
"The solution is very easy to use; once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple, with a great user-friendly interface, good support, fine pricing, very good configuration handling, solid stability, easy setup and deployment, and the ability to scale, plus a free community edition."
 

Cons

"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"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."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"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."
"There is no good tool to find the Xpath. They should provide a good tool to find Xpath for dynamic elements and integrate API (REST/ SOAP) testing support."
"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
"Primarily there are improvements I can suggest: Its does not support AJAX requests It is not optimized for testing on mobile devices"
"Currently WebDriver is having issues running against the latest of Firefox."
"There is no technical support available for Selenium, as it is an open-source product."
"Sometimes, without codes or tests being altered, errors would result. This was often due to the speed at which the test was run."
"The reporting part can be better. They need some APIs or maybe in-built libraries for reporting."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"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."
"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."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"The solution is open source."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"It is free to use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise52
 

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

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.