We performed a comparison between Perfecto and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Their team is really great to work with. They're very flexible, and they always show care. They prioritize our work, our company, and our working relationship. I appreciate the ad hoc sessions that they schedule to provide help with troubleshooting, provide the information that we're looking for, or do a demo of a new feature that they have. They're always willing and very quick to get that scheduled for us. I appreciate that a lot."
"The number one feature, which if we didn't have out-of-the-box would be missed, is the fact that we have video execution. That gives us the ability to view errors or defects in the progression, from beginning to the end of the video."
"The reporting feature is really tough to find in some of the other products that are competitors. Having your CITB type dashboard, where we can see the test results and see recordings of each test that passed or failed, is probably one of the distinguishing aspects of Perfecto."
"In terms of cross-platform testing, they offer all of it, every device available in the market. It covers real scenarios that mimic production so that we don't miss out on any devices that our clients might be using to run the applications we develop. It's been great and very helpful."
"In terms of Perfecto's ability to perform cross-platform testing, I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is automated testing."
"There are a whole bunch of things that I like about the solution, but I really love the interaction it has with mobile devices, the testing capabilities, as well as reporting capabilities that we get from the application. The reports are very detailed."
"The automation piece is the most valuable feature. Every time we had a new version of either OS or an application, we found that being able to automate the testing across different devices is very valuable."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"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. These are some of the most important benefits."
"The tool is easy to use and log in with respect to other tools. It is open-source. We can customize the product. I also like its security."
"It is compatible with and supports multiple languages, such as Java and Python. It is open source, and it is widely used."
"When using devices on the cloud, it lags quite a bit at times. I know that these are real devices that are being projected on our laptop screens and monitors, but if the speed could be improved, that would be good."
"It would be ideal if there was a complete integration with other test management tools and other applications like HPLM, Micro Focus, or Microsoft Azure."
"I'm hoping that Perfecto will come up with browser testing as well because it would be easier to access it."
"Its performance should be improved. Anything to speed up the user interface would be a great help. We've had a lot of pain with their migration from a product UI that was based on Adobe Flash to the new product that is based on HTML5. Migrations like that seemed to be very painful and not a real smooth process. We're still sort of recovering from that migration from old technology to new, and we haven't got all the functionality ported over that we used to have on the old UI."
"We've had a couple of issues lately with videos not loading or browsers dying after some execution, although that happens very rarely."
"Going by the dashboard or analytics capabilities that Perfecto or Perforce is looking to offer in its roadmap, it will certainly help if they also cater to executing and enabling decision-making, rather than just focusing on standard testing metrics such as execution, efficiency, and defect rate. These are good metrics, but they don't necessarily enable decision-making for SLTs. Any improvements in the dashboards and reporting tools should focus on metrics or SLAs that can help with decision-making."
"I'm hoping they can support on-premises instances. We have been working on a JIRA integration with Perfecto—and I'm extremely impressed that they have that—but at this time they're not supporting onsite JIRA instances, which is what we have."
"It is slow compared to physical device testing. The interactive speed could be improved."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"The reporting part can be better."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
Perfecto is ranked 3rd in Functional Testing Tools with 23 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Perfecto is rated 8.4, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Perfecto writes "Its reporting allows us to have a clear view regarding what tests have been executed". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Perfecto is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Appium, AWS Device Farm and Katalon Studio, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test. See our Perfecto vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
