BrowserStack vs CA Testing Tools [EOL] comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and CA Testing Tools [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This solution costs less than competing products."
  • "The price is fine."
  • "There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
  • "BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
  • "The price of BrowserStack is high."
  • "Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
  • More BrowserStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:With respect to pricing, they are a bit expensive. I would rate the licensing model a six out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap. So, the price could be a bit decreased.
    Top Answer:The issue with the product stems from the fact that when we try to do a single or multiple login on multiple browsers for simulation in scenarios where users use Chrome, Mozilla, and Edge, all… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    5th
    Views
    8,845
    Comparisons
    6,910
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    353
    Rating
    7.9
    Unranked
    In Functional Testing Tools
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Overview
    BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.
    Information Not Available
    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    a.s.r.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company55%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Marketing Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business27%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise45%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 23 reviews while CA Testing Tools [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Functional Testing Tools. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while CA Testing Tools [EOL] is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "A user-friendly tool for performance testing". On the other hand, BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas CA Testing Tools [EOL] is most compared with .

    See our list of best Functional 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.