We performed a comparison between k6 Open Source and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Regression Testing Tools."The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"The tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."
"The tool is easy to use and log in with respect to other tools. It is open-source. We can customize the product. I also like its security."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"The solution is very easy to implement."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"Sometimes we face challenges with Selenium HQ. There are third party tools that we use, for example for reading the images, that are not easy to plug in. The third party add-ons are difficult to get good configuration and do not have good support. I would like to see better integration with other products."
"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."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
k6 Open Source is ranked 14th in Regression Testing Tools with 2 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Regression Testing Tools with 103 reviews. k6 Open Source is rated 7.6, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of k6 Open Source writes "Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". k6 Open Source is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter, RadView WebLOAD and Akamai CloudTest, 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 Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.