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."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 stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its flexibility, being open source, and it has close to no limits when it comes to integrating with any language, or browser you are using."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"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 most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"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."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"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 solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
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, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio 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.