We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Worksoft Certify based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The main difference between the two solutions is that Worksoft Certify is expensive whereas Selenium HQ is open-source and completely free.
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"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."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"I like its simplicity."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools."
"It helps us to implement automation testing as part of most projects, so the need for manual testing can be reduced. This really accelerates the testing process as a whole. Before, where it could take ten days to test a project, now it takes only one or two days to do the complete testing."
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
"People who don't have coding knowledge are capable of doing automation with Certify. It reduces coding and scripting dependencies."
"Worksoft Certify supports multiple interfaces and applications like SAP, Web, or Silverlight Java, and Mainframe. It is easily integrated."
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"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."
"We do not have enough resources or enough people to employ and hire. So, I'm hiring whoever I find, and they don't always have enough technical knowledge to operate Selenium."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs."
"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."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."
"The technical support comes on, and says, "Oh, so-and-so link is here, go through that link, and make the modifications." I'm not comfortable in making those changes. I want to schedule a call, share my screen, and have them fix it for me."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"I would like Worksoft Certify to do automation at any layer (the UI layer, API layer, or database layer) and challenge competitors in the RPA industry, like UiPath and Automation Anywhere."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"It would be great if our business testers could develop their own automated test cases. With every release you do, you have to go back and touch your old test cases and bring them up to speed, or develop new test cases. In the beginning, that is a challenge because you have to have someone who is certified in the tool to help you develop these test cases."
"We can use it for the web application, but we are facing stability-related challenges. The properties are getting changed. For example, when I am performing any operation on the text box but the development team has done some changes, our Worksoft scripts are getting changed. This is the main challenge that we are facing while developing tests for the web application in Worksoft Certify, where any changes in the backend are indirectly impacting our scripts. For the web application, there is a scarcity of resources. Unlike an SAP application that doesn't require much experience, for the web application, you require experienced people."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Telerik Test Studio, OpenText Silk Test and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, UiPath Test Suite and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our Selenium HQ vs. Worksoft Certify 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.
