We performed a comparison between RadView WebLOAD and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"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."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"It would be better to have a simplified way to locate and identify web elements."
"Coding skills are required to use Selenium, so it could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers."
"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 can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
RadView WebLOAD is ranked 11th in Performance Testing Tools with 9 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA).
We monitor all Performance 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.