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

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 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

Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
24th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (15th), Test Automation Tools (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.6%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.1%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Selenium HQ3.6%
Telerik Test Studio1.1%
Other95.3%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The ability to customize our approach to using Selenium HQ is particularly beneficial."
"Selenium is a valuable tool for web testing, and it integrates easily with frameworks like the Gauge framework, making it easier than others. It supports different programming languages, including Java and JavaScript."
"The stability and performance are good."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
 

Cons

"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"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 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."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"Selenium is open-source."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"It is free to use."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google."
"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
23%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business40
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise51
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about Selenium HQ vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.