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

Selenium HQ vs TestingWhiz comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
4th
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
TestingWhiz
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
22nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.2%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestingWhiz is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.2%
TestingWhiz0.9%
Other94.9%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Sri Durga U - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Engineer Data at Epsilon
Offers versatility in testing automation while improvements can elevate its capabilities
I currently use Jenkins and Maven for framework development. The flow involves creating the project with Maven, and once test case execution is completed locally, we push the jobs to Jenkins. It automatically triggers the executions in Jenkins so everyone in the team can see the execution report and status. I would rate the solution at 60% out of 100. Previously, troubleshooting was difficult. When test cases fail for various reasons, logs cannot explain everything, but logging is very important to get the failure results. For logging, Amazon Q will suggest where the log code needs to be included. In Jenkins, when the code is executed and results are viewed, we can easily identify where the error occurred and troubleshoot efficiently, reducing time by two to three hours. I can recommend many packages with Selenium HQ. Wait conditions and numerous features are available to use. I recommend most of them to individuals. My overall rating for Selenium HQ is 7 out of 10.
VS
Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies
Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very stable."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days and it saves a lot of time."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"Selenium is an open-source tool."
"If you have a web application, I would strongly recommend this, as it has a lot of benefits as described above."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves; I think it's perfect, as it's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."
 

Cons

"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"I'm giving it an eight because there are a lot of things Selenium is not supporting."
"I observed like batch execution issues and comparability issues like AngularJS app's etc."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"The free option is very limited, but the pay version is expensive."
"I would like to see a better method handling. I mean methods/properties like Displayed, which should return false when there is no such element on the page instead NoSuchElementException, which has to be handled in my code – it should be provided with Selenium."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"It is an open-source solution."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"I have been using the open-source version."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
No data available
 

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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?
It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.
What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?
Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...
What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: May 2026.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.