We performed a comparison between Panaya Test Dynamix and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."
"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."
"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."
"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"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."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"It supports many external plugins, and because it's a Java-based platform, it's language-independent. You can use Java, C#, Python, etc."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write."
"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."
"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."
"The reporting part can be better."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
"Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%."
"The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"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."
Panaya Test Dynamix is ranked 23rd in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. Panaya Test Dynamix is rated 8.6, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Panaya Test Dynamix writes "More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Panaya Test Dynamix is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest, Worksoft Certify, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA). See our Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools 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.