No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
5th
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
28th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.8%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
Telerik Test Studio1.8%
Other93.9%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Manager consultant - Digital assurance Services at adrosonic
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
Manager Project Management at Capgemini
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

"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"I do recommend Selenium HQ to other organizations because we are in a business that is primarily based on B2B interface."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"I believe Selenium HQ to be the best solution in the market for automating web applications"
"We are now able to execute 3000 test cases in less than one hour."
"There are many useful features in Selenium that I like, and of the new features I particularly enjoy the Selenium Grid. With this, we can run many test cases in one go, and in one suite we can extract multiple results."
"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."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"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 most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The object repository is the most valuable feature, as different elements can be identified and reutilized through the repository across other scripts, and the product has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
 

Cons

"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"The documentation could use some work but there are books that fill this hole."
"They can improve test reporting, and more importantly on test scripts, by providing less constructs to automate more complex testing scenarios."
"The initial setup is little complicated the installation could be simplified."
"There are sometimes delays and if we are moving into a new Chrome version or a new Firefox version, there can be delays of up to a couple of days to figure out the plugins and there's no immediate support available."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"Sometimes, without codes or tests being altered, errors would result. This was often due to the speed at which the test was run."
"Due to its high rate in releases sometimes working code cannot be executed after an upgrade due to a new feature or different behaviour."
"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."
"We have not seen a return on investment yet."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"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."
"The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"Selenium HQ costs around $1000 per month, which is a bit high based on what they're offering."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"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.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise52
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 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.
What needs improvement with Selenium HQ?
Some improvements can be implemented as compared to Playwright, which is why I rate it seven out of ten.
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: September 2026.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.