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

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Rational Test Workbench
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (20th), API Testing Tools (16th), Test Automation Tools (36th)
Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM Rational Test Workbench is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.3%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Selenium HQ, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 3.6% mindshare, down 4.6% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Rational Test Workbench1.3%
Apache JMeter16.4%
Tricentis NeoLoad13.8%
Other68.5%
Performance Testing Tools
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Selenium HQ3.6%
Tricentis Tosca18.5%
BrowserStack10.2%
Other67.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
Good integration with other tools, stable, scales easily
There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation. This includes the workbench as well as the other tools. In the future, I would like to see the other types of tests supported, that are not already covered in the DevOps approach. This would include, for example, penetration testing.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"It is stable. I have never encountered any concerning situations with Selenium HQ."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"It supports many external plugins, and because it's a Java-based platform, it's language-independent. You can use Java, C#, Python, etc."
 

Cons

"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"Selenium has been giving us failures sometimes. It is not working one hundred percent of the time when we are creating elements. They need to improve the stability of the solution."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"It is free to use."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Selenium is open-source."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"The pricing is open source."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Non Profit
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business40
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 do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
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.
 

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.