CrossBrowserTesting vs Worksoft Certify comparison

SmartBear and Worksoft are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #27, while Worksoft is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.6. SmartBear holds a 1.3% mindshare in FT, compared to Worksoft’s 4.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Worksoft users who would recommend it.

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

727 Views
625 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Worksoft Certify

Read 77 Worksoft Certify reviews

3,668 Views
3,118 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Worksoft Certify

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Worksoft Certify and CrossBrowserTesting are competing products in software testing automation and cross-browser analysis. Worksoft Certify has the advantage in comprehensive test automation, while CrossBrowserTesting stands out in cross-browser analysis due to its extensive range of supported devices and browsers.

Features: Worksoft Certify provides robust automation solutions, including end-to-end validation across applications, a parameter-driven approach that eliminates scripting confusion, and excellent integration with SAP. CrossBrowserTesting offers real browser testing, complete with access to numerous devices for thorough compatibility checks. It features live, automated, and visual testing tools enhancing broad compatibility testing capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Worksoft Certify could improve its initial setup complexity and reduce the learning curve for new users. Enhancing integration with various non-SAP applications and improving reporting features would be beneficial. CrossBrowserTesting can focus on reducing occasional lag in session startup and improving screenshot clarity. Better integration with CI/CD pipelines and expanding its range of supported devices could be advantageous.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Worksoft Certify requires extensive initial setup but offers robust support systems that assist in achieving automation goals quickly. CrossBrowserTesting, thanks to its cloud-based model, ensures easier deployment and reliable customer support, providing simplified setup and use.

Pricing and ROI: Worksoft Certify demands a higher initial investment, justified by its extensive automation capabilities leading to reduced manual testing and improved efficiency. CrossBrowserTesting, being cost-effective with its flexible pricing, offers fast ROI due to enhanced testing capabilities across numerous platforms, appealing to those needing affordability and cross-browser consistency.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,114 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

27th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Worksoft Certify

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Worksoft Certify is 4.3%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Worksoft Certify	4.3%
CrossBrowserTesting	1.3%
Other	94.4%

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

Muddisetty Arun Kumar

WorkSoft Certified Automation Engineer at Qualesce

Automation has delivered strong ROI with AI-driven test prioritization and parallel reporting

The best feature of Worksoft Certify is the automatic report generation. Unlike traditional tools like Selenium or Java-based frameworks where reporting often requires custom coding, Certify handles this natively. We are currently utilizing the 14.5 version, which has modernized these capabilities, though we frequently manage backward compatibility for clients still running on the 12.x version series.

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

"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."

"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."

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

"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."

"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."

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

"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."

"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."

"The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools."

"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."

"It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility."

"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."

"LiveTouch is the best feature of Worksoft Certify; live touching the objects is very beneficial, and we can use the dynamic windows and objects."

"I would say Worksoft Certify is good and the best one to date when automating an SAP platform."

"Provides all the in-built functionalities and is a wonderful tool."

More Worksoft Certify pros

Cons

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

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

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

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

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"We can't get the process intelligence module to work properly. We can't get the impact comment that analyzes the incoming development code to run, either. We've also had bugs in the CTM and execution manager in the past year. It took technical support a long time to resolve this issue. We escalated it so that the vice president of the company was included as well."

"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."

"There have been some previous security concerns with the way that Capture has worked. When you turn it on, you don't know what it's capturing. This has raised some concerns in the past, especially in our European regions."

"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."

"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."

"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."

"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."

"For the couple of the issues that we were really scratching our heads over, we were in communication with the technical support several times, but they never got back to us."

More Worksoft Certify cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"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."

"I can only judge based on the situation that we had around six years ago when we did the tool evaluation. Worksoft was not the cheapest, but it provided the value. For 25 concurrent licenses, we paid more than €400,000, so it was not cheap. In the end, if you see how much time you are saving and compare it with others, its price is okay. We had also compared its cost with the licensing costs for HP and Tricentis, and they were at another level. Now, as we have already booked the licenses, we only have to pay an annual maintenance fee, which is 70%, and that is okay."

"We no longer need ten people sitting and manually testing something. We can just have one person running the entire regression automation testing suite, and this has saved us dollars."

"The license cost is quite high. This might not be a consideration for a large company, but it will be for a small company. E.g., Tricentis (their competitor) offers certain exclusive use cases where a company can use it in a certain way, so this is another option that companies consider."

"It is expensive compared to some of the other automation tools in the market. However, the benefits and ROI has proved that it has been a good investment."

"The tool is not really good at all because you need to purchase some additional tools."

"On our last big SAP implementation project, we inserted an automation resource into the beginning of the project. Between automating regression processes, data staging, and using our automation to help repair cutover and conversion issues. We saved the project about $1,700,000."

"We've saved over 80 percent in time savings."

"Worksoft Capture 2.0 can help our customers to accelerate their automation development at least 40 percent faster than any other commercial tools available in the market."

More Worksoft Certify pricing and cost advice

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

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Performing Arts

Government

University

Manufacturing Company

16%

Retailer

10%

Computer Software Company

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	65

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?

Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...

See all answers

What do you like most about Worksoft Certify?

A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Worksoft Certify?

I find the pricing not expensive at all as it depends on how many users will be required.

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 31% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 9% of the time

LambdaTest vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 8% of the time

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 5% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Worksoft Certify

Compared 50% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Worksoft Certify

Compared 8% of the time

Selenium HQ vs Worksoft Certify

Compared 7% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Worksoft Certify

Compared 4% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Worksoft Certify

Compared 4% of the time

More Worksoft Certify Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

January 2026

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Worksoft Certify

January 2026

Download Worksoft Certify 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

Worksoft Certify offers codeless automation for efficient test scripting by non-programmers. It integrates with SAP, supports multiple interfaces, and ensures seamless end-to-end testing, facilitating time savings and streamlined operations.

Worksoft Certify stands out for its unique codeless automation capabilities, enabling users without programming skills to easily create automated test scripts. Its Capture feature effortlessly records user actions, accelerating test development. Integration with SAP systems and support across various interfaces make it highly versatile. The tool's architecture allows for easy script maintenance and decouples scripts from data, speeding up testing processes while minimizing manual effort. Although it's known for excellence in automating SAP applications, there is room for improvement in areas like web and mobile integration, UI enhancements, and support responsiveness.

What are the key features of Worksoft Certify?

Codeless Automation: Enables easy script creation without coding skills.
Capture Feature: Records actions for rapid test development.
SAP Integration: Ensures seamless operation within SAP environments.
Interface Support: Enhances versatility across multiple platforms.
End-to-End Testing: Facilitates comprehensive testing cycles.

What are the benefits and ROI to consider?

Time Savings: Automation drastically reduces testing time.
Reduced Manual Intervention: Minimizes errors and enhances efficiency.
Supporting Transformations: Aids large-scale SAP and cloud transformations.
Scalability: Handles large datasets with stability and reliability.
Maintenance: Decoupled scripts ensure easy updates and management.

In industries relying on SAP and ERP systems, Worksoft Certify serves as a valuable tool for automating regression and integration testing. Organizations benefit from reduced manual testing effort and faster project delivery times. It's extensively utilized in sectors requiring large-scale SAP deployment and cloud application integration, making it integral in streamlining business operations.

Worksoft

Sample Customers

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

Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify

January 2026

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify

Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify report.

See our list of best Functional 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.