We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"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."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
"There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
Selenium HQ is ranked 3rd in Regression Testing Tools with 33 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 6th in Regression Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Easy to learn with accurate recordings and good consistency". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Telerik Test Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify and BrowserStack, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Apache JMeter. See our Selenium HQ vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.