We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."Support was very quick to help us identify a problem and fix it immediately"
"The overall application monitoring ability to do alerts."
"We are using Dynatrace for prediction and staging for every step of our development cycle."
"We have used Dynatrace in our performance testing environments to get ahead of issues before they make it into production."
"Dynatrace has great training available. It is easy for everybody to use. Anybody can go out to YouTube, watch a video, and figure out how to use the piece that they need."
"It is our main SaaS monitoring and alerting solution, and it allows us to identify many problems that we would miss if we did not have a comprehensive monitoring solution."
"I like the drill-down feature, that it can drill down to the code level to point to where the problems are. It's also helpful for the developers to identify what exactly happens, rather than the operation team having to do so. It works well for the developers to fix issues."
"The web dashboard is very simple to use."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"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."
"DevOps plugin monitoring tools need improvement."
"Enterprise application monitoring for synthetic, as is, only captures http/https transactions."
"Improvements in Synthetic monitoring would be great. Certain features of thick client, if available in the web interface, would also be a great improvement."
"Ease of use could be improved because it can be hard to determine how you made it to the screen you are on and how to get back to it later."
"We'd like it to be more user-friendly, which, in our case, might be a big ask as we have a fairly complex environment."
"Add support for Ruby."
"They need better infrastructure monitoring. New Relic is beating them for infrastructure monitoring."
"It needs improvement with proprietary protocols for the DC RUM part."
"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."
"Selenium has been giving us failures sometimes. It is not working one hundred percent of the time when we are creating elements. They need to improve the stability of the solution."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 342 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Dynatrace writes "AI identifies all the components of a response-time issue or failure, hugely benefiting our triage efforts". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA).
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
