Compare Selenium HQ vs. Telerik Test Studio

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Selenium HQ Logo
15,494 views|12,698 comparisons
Telerik Test Studio Logo
2,673 views|2,119 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Use Telerik Test Studio? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2020.
437,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The testing solution produces the best web applications.What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do.I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support.Ability to integrate with every other tool.The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel.The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer.The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing.The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment took about seven months.

More Selenium HQ Pros »

The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface.

More Telerik Test Studio Pros »

Cons
Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code.Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be.There should be standardized frameworks to build automation.Could have additional readability and abstraction.I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers.The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing.The solution's UI path needs to be modernized.Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear.

More Selenium HQ Cons »

The charts need to be more detailed and customizable.

More Telerik Test Studio Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
We are satisfied with the pricing.

More Selenium HQ 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.
437,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel.
Top Answer: Selenium is open-source so it is free to use the solution. You only pay for whoever is implementing and/or the server that you are deploying on.
Top Answer: I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers.
Top Answer: The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface.
Top Answer: The customization could be improved. The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging. The charts need to be more detailed and customizable.
Top Answer: We use the on-premises deployment model. I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten.
Ranking
6th
Views
15,494
Comparisons
12,698
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
454
Avg. Rating
7.6
24th
Views
2,673
Comparisons
2,119
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
165
Avg. Rating
8.0
Popular Comparisons
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Also Known As
SeleniumHQ
Learn
SeleniumHQ
Video Not Available
Progress
Overview

Selenium HQ is a suite of tools to automate web browsers across many platforms. Selenium runs in many browsers and operating systems and can be controlled by many programming languages and testing frameworks. Selenium consist of two types:

  1. Selenium WebDriver - create robust, browser-based regression automation suites & tests and scale & distribute scripts across many environments.
  2. Selenium IDE - create quick bug reproduction scripts and create scripts to aid in automation-aided exploratory testing.
Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.
Offer
Learn more about Selenium HQ
Learn more about Telerik Test Studio
Sample Customers
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear SoftwareFox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm32%
Retailer18%
Comms Service Provider9%
Manufacturing Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company41%
Comms Service Provider9%
Government6%
Financial Services Firm6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company41%
Comms Service Provider12%
Retailer7%
Construction Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2020.
437,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Selenium HQ is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 9 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 1 review. Selenium HQ is rated 7.6, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Gives a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Telerik Test Studio writes "A straightforward initial setup, easy to scale and a good user interface". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Functional, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Silk Test, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, Ranorex Studio, Micro Focus UFT One and Tricentis Tosca.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.