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

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL] vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 8, 2025

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

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL]
Average Rating
5.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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)
 

Featured Reviews

AK
Shared change lists are helpful, but poor scalability leads to problems with instability
The biggest problems with this solution have to do with scale. If the load is high then your request is put on hold for a second, and then you have to handle it. If you make a lot of requests then it is your problem. It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time. Any additional request would be put on hold and made to wait for a few seconds. Once the network and infrastructure are loaded to handle the next request, it would proceed.
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

"The most valuable feature is the option to pull changes from others or make local changes in your own change list."
"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."
"Language support - since it supports Java and other programming languages it is easy to integrate with other systems."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"I like its simplicity."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"What I like best about it is that it can automate everything on the front end with the help of other frameworks. The community worldwide provides support for any issues. Plus, it’s open-source, which is a big advantage."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
 

Cons

"It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues."
"There are stability issues with Internet Explorer only."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"The solution could be improved regarding communication with browsers, as it is slower and a bit tricky compared to other frameworks. However, with the latest changes involving BiDirectional communication, it is becoming a top choice in automation frameworks."
"There are some synchronization issues"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is open source."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
"It is all free."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"It is an open-source solution."
"I have been using the open-source version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
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 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

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ubisoft, Expedia, Honda, Samsung,Citrix
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: October 2025.
873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.