We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Tricentis Flood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"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."
"Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run."
"Language support - since it supports Java and other programming languages it is easy to integrate with other systems."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Tricentis Flood is ranked 18th in Load Testing Tools. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Flood is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Flood writes "Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Telerik Test Studio, Worksoft Certify, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Tricentis Flood is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud.
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.