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
28th
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
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.8%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Worksoft Certify is 5.2%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
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.…
Shailesh-Parkhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful automation tool with a user-friendly interface, codeless automation, and adaptability to complex business processes, particularly in SAP environments
The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers. Even during the initial learning phase, I found it remarkably user-friendly. It facilitates quick onboarding and training of new resources. It offers features for building automation scripts, such as search and certify capture. A notable advantage is that it doesn't rely on other tools like Micro Focus UFT or Micro Focus ALM for script execution. Worksoft can run independently without the need for support from Microsoft Office, although the option to use it for maintaining data exists. The tool also includes debugging features and comprehensive reporting capabilities, generating PDF reports for easy analysis.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"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."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"What I found most valuable in Worksoft Certify is its identification feature. I also found its automation feature valuable."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
 

Cons

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"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."
"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."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"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."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"The stability needs help. This is main thing that needs help, and if it's not the stability, then it's Worksoft's ability to respond to issues."
"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."
"As part of our weekly regression, we wanted to use Execution Manager. However, from 2017 until March 2021, Execution Manager was not working as expected in our enrollment. It could have been better. If Execution Manager had worked well, then we could have doubled our productivity. Unfortunately, it had problems."
"We have had run ins with some bugs on Business Process Procedure (BPP) and Execution Manager."
"The overall speed and performance of this solution could be improved. In a future release, it would be useful to be able to do API testing."
"Certify is integrated with Solution Manager, but this integration could be easier."
"One feature that could be added to Capture 2.0 is generating a PDF file from your capture, so you can see your screenshots and steps."
"The product had some UI issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"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."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"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."
"If we do one manual process, it could take approximately two hours. The same process using Worksoft probably takes ten minutes."
"Worksoft Certify is priced higher than most tools."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"We ended up buying too many licenses. They were very good at selling it to us, and probably oversold it a little. We bought 45 licenses and have never used more than twenty. However, they gave us a pretty significant discount on the bigger license, so it made sense for us to buy enough that we wouldn't have to go back and ask for more."
"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."
"It is costly. It is a bit more expensive than Tricentis Tosca and other tools. If they reduce its price going forward and have partnerships with other vendors, it will grow like anything."
"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."
"There is a cost involved to doing it, but once you get over the initial cost, then you'll start reaping the benefits and seeing that testing is getting done more quickly and efficiently. We are still early on with it, but the expectation and what we're seeing is that we will start seeing some savings coming out on the back-end once we have this done."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Retailer
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
 

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: May 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.