We performed a comparison between Panaya Test Dynamix and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The solution helps with recording and documentation."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"It is a scalable solution."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"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 am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"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."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
"Nothing is automatic."
"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 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."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way."
"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%."
"There is no good tool to find the Xpath. They should provide a good tool to find Xpath for dynamic elements and integrate API (REST/ SOAP) testing support."
"The latest versions are often unstable."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
"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 5 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Panaya Test Dynamix is rated 8.4, 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 "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Panaya Test Dynamix is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest, Worksoft Certify and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
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.
