We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Zeenyx AscentialTest 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 features are the ability to test and debug."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"Coding skills are required to use Selenium, so it could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
"It would be better to have a simplified way to locate and identify web elements."
"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."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"The latest versions are often unstable."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
Earn 20 points
Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 34th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.4. 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 Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete.
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.