We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."This is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"AppScan is stable."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"The product has valuable features for static and dynamic testing."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"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 and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"The solution is free to use."
"Language support - since it supports Java and other programming languages it is easy to integrate with other systems."
"It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies."
"If HCL AppScan is able to alert the clients over email once the scan is complete, it would be great. Right now, HCL AppScan doesn't let me know if the scanning part is finished or not, because of which I have to come back and check mostly."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"It's a little bit basic when you talk about the Web Services. If AppScan improved its maturity on Web Services testing, that would be good."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"AppScan is too complicated and should be made more user-friendly."
"We would like to integrate with some of the other reporting tools that we're planning to use in the future."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements."
"It would be better if it accommodated non-techy end-users. I think it's still a product for developers. That's why it's not common for end-users, and especially for RPA activities or tasks. It's hard to automate tasks for end-users. If it will be easier, more user-friendly, and so on, perhaps it can be more interesting for this kind of user."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"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."
HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 39 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.6, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, Checkmarx One and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Application Security 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.
