Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CrossBrowserTesting vs Worksoft Certify comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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
19
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
77
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
ProductMarket Share (%)
Worksoft Certify4.3%
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.…
Muddisetty Arun Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
WorkSoft Certified Automation Engineer at Qualesce
Automation has delivered strong ROI with AI-driven test prioritization and parallel reporting
Worksoft Certify is a great product and brings good solutions. It is cost-effective, but not everyone is willing to pay the price. While it is nice and brings a great ROI, it appears to be a longer-term investment, which is why not everyone is eager to procure it given the issues related to licensing. I would recommend Worksoft Certify as a solution to others. My overall review rating for this product is 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"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 ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."
"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."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"The tool is easy to use. It is a drag and drop Microsoft type of solution."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"Our business users are doing regression testing as their day job. This is an add-on to their daily work. With everything so pressured in the industry, automation takes the pressure of these users."
"Worksoft Certify has good integration capabilities with third-party tools."
"The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"The most valuable feature is having a no-code solution for automation, so our QA team and some of our business users can work on automation. Then, they don't have to be developers."
"Mostly in the area of project testing, the most immediate benefit is when you historically have manual testers do a certain job, and a full regression testing was previously done 100 percent manually. We have had cases where the release testing for an entire region would take around 12 weeks. With Worksoft, we are now down to two to three weeks. So, that is one use case where we have had success."
 

Cons

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"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."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Some features are missing from a testing perspective. You need to know how to connect everything to create requirements and stability metrics for the routine."
"We would like this to be able to be used outside of SAP applications, as it would be good for other types of products."
"The problem with Worksoft Certify is that it's not always stable. It runs on a live platform that's constantly changing, so the test script needs to be adjusted every time, which is very painful."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"Based on my colleagues' feedback, there are still some minor issues concerning continuous testing, particularly related to the timeout feature."
"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."
"Sometimes Worksoft Certify works very slowly compared to other testing tools, which is something I want to mention."
"Based on my colleagues' feedback, there are still some minor issues concerning continuous testing, particularly related to the timeout feature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"Automating our manual processes has saved us 70 to 80 percent in time."
"Saving money and better quality, these are the benefits of Certify."
"The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP."
"Worksoft has paid for itself fives times over."
"The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks."
"I don't have much idea about the pricing, but it is a licensed tool, and it is somewhat costly."
"By using automation, it reduced about 75 percent of the time when compared to any other tool."
"We have seen that the initial Worksoft implementation has helped our customers reduce their testing cycle time by 50 percent. With further continuous improvement, we have seen cycle time reduced up to 75 percent. That is the level of productivity achieved using Worksoft Certify."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Performing Arts
10%
Transportation Company
8%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Retailer
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
 

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 Business11
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise65
 

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...
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.
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.
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,986 professionals have used our research since 2012.