No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 3.3%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BrowserStack3.3%
CrossBrowserTesting1.4%
Other95.3%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Managing Technical Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing has accelerated releases and now needs smarter AI-driven test creation
The best features that BrowserStack offers include the ability to run manual and automated tests on real devices. We can create bugs, integrate it with other platforms like Jira or Azure, and use self-healing scripts with Selenium. We also have the test runs for different versions or with different frameworks, not just Selenium but with Playwright as well. Additionally, there are real-time dashboards and notifications sent when tests fail or when we need screenshots or recordings of test executions, and we can easily integrate this into our pipelines. BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by providing an out-of-the-box solution for whole test executions across different projects for our automobile customers. We have worked on around twenty to thirty projects, and the need for a stable, customizable single test execution platform that supports different platforms has been met. It has helped manage the entire quality assurance of the product efficiently. The measurable improvements due to BrowserStack include a significant efficiency gain, allowing the whole team to collaborate on testing and communicate faster. Also, the easier integration with project management tools has been beneficial. The documentation of findings has improved, which helps us share insights with different project stakeholders.
CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The device farm is one of the positive impacts we have seen from using BrowserStack."
"The integration is very good."
"When we reached out to BrowserStack, they were great."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted our organization by improving collaboration and showing quality improvements in releases, with the number of defects leaking into production significantly reduced."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."
"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."
"Due to serious testing needs across platforms and devices, we found CrossBrowserTesting a useful tool as it has the capability for functional testing, UI testing, automated testing just on few clicks."
"The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."
 

Cons

"I think a possible improvement for BrowserStack could be adding features such as sending SMS or making FaceTime calls because, as far as I know, those features are not available at the moment."
"I didn't appreciate much about the stability; there have been times that BrowserStack was really, really slow, and that's why I am looking into a different tool."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"Sometimes connectivity can be a problem. We will be in the middle of testing and we will lose connectivity sometimes."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"BrowserStack sometimes works well and other times it is very slow."
"BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"Automated testing could be improved."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution costs less than competing products."
"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."
"The price is fine."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"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."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
Improvements for BrowserStack could include better usability when working under a private network or a VPN, since it can be challenging to access restricted URLs. There are times when running an au...
What is your primary use case for BrowserStack?
In the start of my career, I performed functional testing on mobile devices and web applications, and I used BrowserStack for testing web applications and mobile applications for one year. My main ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.