We performed a comparison between Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."The pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"It is a good automation tool."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"I like the record and playback features. We also appreciate that it's not just writing on a script that we create. While we were browsing our web application, it automatically records all the clicks and movements of points. We also appreciate the fact that it provides screenshots of everything in the output."
"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."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"A lot of time you start the stress testing, and you sign the log in again, and I want to get rid of that. It's just not clear to me how to do it yet."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"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."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"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."
More Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is ranked 16th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing writes "User-friendly, cheap, and quick to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Load 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.