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

Oracle Application Testing Suite 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

Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (17th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.5%
Other94.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.
Sri Durga U - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Engineer Data at Epsilon
Offers versatility in testing automation while improvements can elevate its capabilities
I currently use Jenkins and Maven for framework development. The flow involves creating the project with Maven, and once test case execution is completed locally, we push the jobs to Jenkins. It automatically triggers the executions in Jenkins so everyone in the team can see the execution report and status. I would rate the solution at 60% out of 100. Previously, troubleshooting was difficult. When test cases fail for various reasons, logs cannot explain everything, but logging is very important to get the failure results. For logging, Amazon Q will suggest where the log code needs to be included. In Jenkins, when the code is executed and results are viewed, we can easily identify where the error occurred and troubleshoot efficiently, reducing time by two to three hours. I can recommend many packages with Selenium HQ. Wait conditions and numerous features are available to use. I recommend most of them to individuals. My overall rating for Selenium HQ is 7 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is the best tool I have used till today as it allows us to handle automation in variety of ways."
"I can organize test scripts pretty well."
"This product can facilitate the lowering of test execution times for operational people, as the bulk of the repeating test steps can be taken away by automating the EBS regression set in OpenScript every release."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"The best feature of this and Load Test is simplicity."
"It helped in running performance testing cycles and identifying the bottlenecks of the application, helping our clients to run their application successfully and smoothly."
"I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good."
"There are many useful features in Selenium that I like, and of the new features I particularly enjoy the Selenium Grid. With this, we can run many test cases in one go, and in one suite we can extract multiple results."
"Nowadays we are using the solution to allow old solutions to run through it, so we don't need to go check functionalities created previously, as we just run the automation in one click, which saves a lot of time and allows us to focus on other things."
"Hot tool in market. Makes thing easier to use and implement."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"Compared to commercial tools such as TestComplete, Selenium WebDriver is a better choice for web auto-testing."
"Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run."
 

Cons

"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"I would rate their technical support 2.5 out of ten."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"I think that licensing policies could be more intuitive; when we installed this application for the first time, we couldn't understand why there were only two users."
"There is one piece of functionality that is currently not offered and would be very good to have: Support for Digital Certificates authentication and Single Sign-On (SSO)."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
"We have stability issues with the server logging off when a script runs from OTM."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
"There are some synchronization issues"
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca."
"I'm giving it an eight because there are a lot of things Selenium is not supporting."
"There is a challenge with concurrent testing, where parallelization is not fully supported."
"Dynamic debugging needs to be improved. Like QTP, there should be an option to run the test from a point or state of application."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"The product is open-source and free."
"It is free."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It's open-source, so it's free."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"Selenium is a free tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise52
 

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

OATS
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.