Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Bitbar vs BrowserStack comparison

SmartBear and BrowserStack are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #26, while BrowserStack is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.3. SmartBear holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to BrowserStack’s 10.4% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of BrowserStack users who would recommend it.
Bitbar
Read 3 Bitbar reviews
  • 731 Views
  • 511 Comparison Views
50% willing to recommend
BrowserStack
Read 25 BrowserStack reviews
  • 5,628 Views
  • 4,724 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

BrowserStack and Bitbar compete in the mobile and web application testing category. BrowserStack holds the upper hand in comprehensive test capabilities, while Bitbar is recognized for flexibility and cost-effectiveness.

Features: BrowserStack offers extensive OS and browser support with instant real device access, broadening test coverage. Its cloud-based infrastructure provides a user-friendly interface. Bitbar's open-source flexibility allows custom test executions, supporting deeper integration for dev teams. It also supports both cloud and on-premises options, providing adaptable solutions.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack simplifies integration and setup with its cloud-based deployment, and provides responsive customer service streamlining onboarding. Bitbar, offering cloud and on-premises options, suits diverse needs with more initial configuration. Its customer service is recognized for technical expertise, offering strong support for tailored solutions.

Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack has higher upfront costs, but its robust infrastructure often delivers high ROI through reduced testing times and efficiency. Bitbar offers competitive pricing models, presenting compelling value for companies using its open-source framework.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Bitbar vs. BrowserStack Report (Updated: May 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Bitbar vs. BrowserStack
May 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 851,604 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Bitbar
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Platforms (11th)
BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 0.8%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1267398 - PeerSpot reviewer
Has the ability to use different frameworks for testing although it is lacking in capability options
Setup depends on how you are using the product. In our case, it was quite simple. We did it ourselves and it didn't take much time, maybe a day. We used one person per team for setup, usually an engineer or developer. For each team, we had one person to assist with deployment. We have multiple teams so each team had someone dealing with setup. We now have two people working in the company who deal with the maintenance of the solution.
Read full review
ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users
I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ability to use different frameworks."
"Game testing and the API for apps are good."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"Maintenance of the solution is easy."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
More BrowserStack pros
 

Cons

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."
"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
More BrowserStack cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"The price is fine."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
See all answers
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Sauce Labs vs Bitbar Logo
Sauce Labs vs Bitbar
Compared 38% of the time
LambdaTest vs Bitbar Logo
LambdaTest vs Bitbar
Compared 16% of the time
More Bitbar Competitors
LambdaTest vs BrowserStack Logo
LambdaTest vs BrowserStack
Compared 34% of the time
Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack Logo
Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack
Compared 23% of the time
Perfecto vs BrowserStack Logo
Perfecto vs BrowserStack
Compared 18% of the time
Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack
Compared 5% of the time
Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs BrowserStack Logo
Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs BrowserStack
Compared 2% of the time
More BrowserStack Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Mobile App Platforms
May 2025
Bitbar reportDownload Bitbar product report
Buyer's Guide
BrowserStack
May 2025
BrowserStack reportDownload BrowserStack product report
 

Also Known As

Testdroid
No data available
 

Overview

Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.
SmartBear

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack
 

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway
Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Buyer's Guide
Bitbar vs. BrowserStack
May 2025
Free Report: Bitbar vs. BrowserStack
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. BrowserStack and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Bitbar vs. BrowserStack report.
See our list of best Functional 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.