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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs Selenium HQ 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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.0%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.0%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Other94.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
NK
DevOps Lead at Illumifin India LLP
Automation revolutionizes testing efficiency and cost savings while ensuring smooth deployment
The challenges I faced while integrating Selenium HQ into my existing systems relate to historical data, which requires going back six years. I have to traverse if there were any challenges because I am sure if there were any, they must have been documented in our ALM documents. The multi-browser support of Selenium HQ impacts my testing process primarily since it is being used in Edge and Chrome browsers. It all depends on our customers. I haven't heard of any challenges with other browsers such as Opera or Mozilla Firefox, as these two browsers are what we primarily use. When we were doing these tests manually, it took several hours of effort, and those hours, when counted on the basis of person days, used to be maybe six or seven months of effort, which we can now do every day by running the pipeline. This has definitely saved a lot of money for us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester, which analyzes the changes in UI elements and allows me to automatically adapt and change my automation testing."
"We gained like seven seconds after moving to Selenium."
"I have invested my time in learning the tool and got good recognition for creating automation framework."
"It's open source, free, stable, and easy to use."
"Selenium is an open-source tool that has significantly reduced the cost for the company."
"The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"Hot tool in market. Makes thing easier to use and implement."
"Some of the most valuable features of this solution are open-source, they have good support, good community support, and it supports multiple languages whether you use C-Sharp or not."
 

Cons

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"With version 8.5 we faced workspace crash issues frequently."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"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."
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"Selenium is open-source."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"Selenium HQ costs around $1000 per month, which is a bit high based on what they're offering."
"It is an open-source tool."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise51
 

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

IBM Rational Functional Tester
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.