We performed a comparison between Helix ALM and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management."Helix ALM enables users to build, make efficient and effective decisions, and use least-cost methods for maximum benefit, as fast as possible. They allow you to see and visualize your configuration."
"The tool offers high stability."
"The most valuable features of Helix ALM are traceability and flexibility."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"It is a good automation tool."
"There are many useful features in Selenium that I like, and of the new features I particularly enjoy the Selenium Grid. With this, we can run many test cases in one go, and in one suite we can extract multiple results."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"Helix ALM should be able to integrate with other systems better. Helix ALM should also have an easier user interface, and the solution needs to have drag-and-drop tools included in it."
"The accountability and the equivalent to using, acting, editing, working with Word, and also importing and exporting from Word needs improvement."
"It would be great to see Perforce's strategy is for implementing intelligence into the process via AI or ML. It's not clearly defined, at least not to my knowledge."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
"The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"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."
"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."
Helix ALM is ranked 7th in Application Requirements Management with 7 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Helix ALM is rated 6.4, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Helix ALM writes "Helix ALM is insanely configurable, with great traceability, and flexibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Helix ALM is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Polarion Requirements and Tricentis qTest, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.