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 (4th), 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 (16th)
 

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 4.1%, up 3.5% compared to last year.
Tricentis Flood, on the other hand, focuses on Load Testing Tools, holds 2.9% mindshare, up 1.6% since last year.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.1%
Tricentis Tosca9.9%
OpenText Functional Testing7.1%
Other78.9%
Functional Testing Tools
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis Flood2.9%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.3%
Tricentis NeoLoad12.2%
Other71.6%
Load 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.
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

"I have invested my time in learning the tool and got good recognition for creating automation framework."
"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 solution has improved the company by reducing a lot of manual work."
"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."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
 

Cons

"The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs."
"It would be better to have a simplified way to locate and identify web elements."
"It would be nice to see more frequent releases and more bug fixes."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
"I had issues testing a flash application with Selenium Webdriver."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"It is all free."
"It is free to use."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"It is free."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"Selenium is open-source."
"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.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
6%
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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.