CrossBrowserTesting vs Testim comparison

Read 10 Testim reviews

1,629 Views
1,150 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

CrossBrowserTesting and Testim are competing products in the automated testing field. Testim appears to have an edge due to its advanced features, while CrossBrowserTesting is favored for its cost-effectiveness and support.

Features: CrossBrowserTesting provides real device testing and a wide browser compatibility, ensuring cross-platform consistency. It supports extensive device selection with real-world scenarios and offers features like screenshots and screen recordings. Testim offers AI-driven testing capabilities for intelligent test creation and adaptive automation, enhancing efficiency and precision with its record and playback feature.

Room for Improvement: CrossBrowserTesting could enhance its AI-driven features and automation capabilities. Improving processing speed and reducing lag times could also benefit users. Testim could improve its customer service to match its deployment and ease of use. Expanding browser coverage and testing speed would add more value.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: CrossBrowserTesting offers straightforward deployment with robust customer support, providing quick setup and issue resolution. Testim's deployment is user-friendly with efficient onboarding but has room for improvement in customer service response.

Pricing and ROI: CrossBrowserTesting offers competitive pricing and a high ROI, appealing for budget-conscious organizations. Testim, with higher setup costs due to its advanced features, provides justified ROI through reduced time and increased test accuracy. The greater initial investment is offset by its enhanced capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. Testim Report (Updated: April 2025).

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Testim

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

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

28th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Testim

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

11th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.8%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Testim is 3.3%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Michael Hutchison

Web Specialist at Mayo Clinic

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

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. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

Read full review

PiyushSingh

Director at Xceedance

A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment

There are a few minor areas where improvements are required, but they are not something that I can discuss at a high level. I will have to ask the team that uses Testim since they can give a better response to what requires improvement in the product. I only manage the team that uses Testim. I cannot be exactly described as an end user of the tool. There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it. There were some trial and error methods our company had to deal with while using the product's documentation, after which we were able to get through the setup phase. I want the documentation to have more information to help users with the setup process. I want the product to be more scalable in the future.

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 CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."

"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."

"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."

"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."

"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."

"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."

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."

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

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"I have seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes."

"The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios."

"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."

"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."

"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."

"The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."

"Testim introduces three services covering validation steps, eliminating the necessity to write complex code."

"It is a highly stable solution."

More Testim pros

Cons

"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."

"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."

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

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"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."

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

"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"In the last couple of months, I have experienced some downtime where it wasn't working."

"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."

"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."

"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."

"There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it."

"There is currently no room for improvement that I can identify as of now."

"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."

"Faster scripting would be beneficial, as test creation is faster now."

More Testim cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"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."

"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."

"The solution is not expensive."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."

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

27%

Financial Services Firm

20%

Government

Real Estate/Law Firm

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Educational Organization

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Testim?

The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Testim?

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Testim?

More advanced AI-based features and features on the API side would help us create better end-to-end test suites.

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 69% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 14% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Testim

Compared 49% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Testim

Compared 21% of the time

Functionize vs Testim

Compared 13% of the time

Testsigma vs Testim

Compared 6% of the time

Applitools vs Testim

Compared 4% of the time

More Testim Competitors

Product Reports

CrossBrowserTesting

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Download Testim product report

Overview

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

SmartBear

Testim is an end-to-end agile testing automation solution which utilizes machine learning for test authoring, execution, and maintenance. Users can create tests in minutes, run thousands of tests in parallel across different browsers, integrate with their existing CI/CD and collaboration tools, and more.

Sample Customers

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

Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Testim