We performed a comparison between Catchpoint and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Nexthink, Lakeside Software, Riverbed and others in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM)."Catchpoint's customer service and support are valuable."
"The best feature in Catchpoint is the alert or the notification my company gets frequently, in particular, every five minutes. It's the notification you get whenever a respective market has an issue. There's also a dashboard in Catchpoint that shows the markets you support, so all the markets will be highlighted graphically in the dashboard whenever there's downtime that could affect you. If there's no issue for a specific market, it will be in green, so in this way, anybody would be able to understand which market has issues and which market has no issues through Catchpoint. The tool is very useful for monitoring activities."
"The most valuable features of Catchpoint are basically the transaction monitors on the API and UI."
"The thing I like most is the tech support in this company, because they have 24/7 chat support. We can chat immediately and ask them about an issue and they keep responding. They create tickets on our behalf and respond."
"The drill-down feature of this product was very good. It allowed us to identify the exact page or area of the site that was causing our customers an issue."
"The solution offers three different ways of slicing data to look for abnormalities."
"We really need the API monitoring, as well as client side session monitoring, the global synthetic monitoring, to track the availability of the systems from the customer side."
"Catchpoint provides a great amount of information."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"It's not too complicated to implement."
"It is compatible with and supports multiple languages, such as Java and Python. It is open source, and it is widely used."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is free to use."
"The old user version was better, it was more user-friendly."
"Trending needs improvement. Currently, out-of-the-box, they provide only seven days availability. So, we have to do queries and we have to go into a separate analysis module, we have to run lot of queries to long-term trends."
"A room for improvement in Catchpoint is that it lacks an automated page updating feature. My company receives all the alerts and notifications it needs, but the page doesn't update automatically. You need to manually refresh the page, so every five minutes you need to refresh it to see the most updated information. If there's an automated page refresh feature, that would help my company. It's a feature that Grafana has. The page auto-refreshes in Grafana, so you don't have to manually refresh the page. If that feature is implemented in Catchpoint, it'll be useful for the users. Another area for improvement in the tool is you have to do a manual task, for example, when you have a notification for a market, you get a zip code that the user could have entered, but if the zip code is incorrect, you have to manually go into Catchpoint and update that parameter, so that manual step is another area in the tool that needs improvement."
"There are essentially a lot of quotas. Nobody wants to sit and manually create monitors for someone who uses synthetic monitoring."
"We would like the script creation feature of this solution to be improved, as it currently requires a complicated manual process to update the scripts."
"A large selection of nodes are available but it is a challenge to test reliably in China and the Middle East."
"There's still too much manual involvement in getting customized test configurations out there. It's good, but it still takes a lot of effort. In other words, it's when you need to configure it to collect a specific variable and that kind of thing."
"It would be great if Catchpoint could incorporate its alerting system instead of relying on separate tools like ServiceNow."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"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."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"Coding skills are required to use Selenium, so it could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
Catchpoint is ranked 5th in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) with 12 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Catchpoint is rated 8.2, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Catchpoint writes "The UI is well designed, so it's easy to get the visibility you want". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Catchpoint is most compared with Dynatrace, ThousandEyes, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and AppDynamics, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) 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.
