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

Selenium HQ vs Tricentis Flood 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
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (5th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
Tricentis Flood
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Selenium HQ is designed for Functional Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 4.3%, up 3.5% compared to last year.
Tricentis Flood, on the other hand, focuses on Load Testing Tools, holds 2.8% mindshare, up 1.7% since last year.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
Tricentis Tosca9.7%
OpenText Functional Testing7.8%
Other78.2%
Functional Testing Tools
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis Flood2.8%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)14.4%
Tricentis NeoLoad13.4%
Other69.4%
Load 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.
Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
SME (Subject Matter Expert) at Maersk
Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options
The solution is not in an optimal state. During POC, we analyzed tool is kept on upgrading. The patch deployment is happening in parallel, things that are working today are not working tomorrow. We eventually sorted it out with help of CSM. We integrated this tool with other software such as Azure client, but many times without a valid or visible reason, the connectivity was breaking. Improvement suggestions- The dashboard creation for the reporting needs to be easier. Currently, the solution does not support multiple script executions and we would like to see support for this.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"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."
"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."
"Web-based application automation are mostly done using Selenium, and it's the right automation tool as a replacement for manual regression testing that indispensably reduces the testing time due to its cross-browser, parallel, and remote executions."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"The cost of the license is better than other solutions; Selenium is a free, open-source tool and to date, we have not paid any additional fees."
"The product is quite stable."
"Without WebDriver and Grid, the sheer size of team/software license required to accomplish this humongous task would have thrown us out of business."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
 

Cons

"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"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."
"There are some network issues, as the line is not very clear. I continuously see failures in threads when it is running in parallel."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"Due to its high rate in releases sometimes working code cannot be executed after an upgrade due to a new feature or different behaviour."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"The solution lacks a little bit in the reporting features."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything."
"The pricing is open source."
"Selenium is an open-source product. It is free."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
"The solution is open source."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
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.
Do you recommend Tricentis Flood?
Tricentis Flood is the kind of versatile load and performance testing solution that my organization and I cannot help but recommend. It is recognized by companies across a wide variety of fields as...
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
Flood IO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Nike, heroku, Soulcycle, NEC, boston.com, Typeform, Xero, Telus
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: July 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.