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

BrowserStack vs HeadSpin comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
HeadSpin
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Mobile APM (6th), Mobile App Testing Tools (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 7.5%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HeadSpin is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BrowserStack7.5%
HeadSpin1.0%
Other91.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CR
Test Software Development Engineer at uShip, Inc.
Streamlined testing experience with valuable features but high costs prompt a look into alternatives
In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things that they don't give you access to, which is understandable. However, being able to have more granular access to the OS would be a good feature. 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 amount of what LambdaTest has to offer for their price point seems to be a better financial choice for any company at this point. I haven't used LambdaTest yet; we are exploring options with other providers at this time, and LambdaTest has been the only one that's provided any kind of cost-saving benefit while not losing any of the functionality that we expect to have with these products. BrowserStack is really expensive, which is super annoying. Anytime you want something new, it costs an exorbitant amount. We just attempted to increase our seats and they wanted almost double what we were paying, which was insane because it wasn't double the seats. Companies need to make money, but they also need to work with their customers because otherwise, they'll lose them to competitors like LambdaTest who offer similar services for significantly less.
Saorabh Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager - QA at Games24x7
It fulfills everything from automation to manual performance
The most valuable features of the product are the performance parameters it gives us, as well as the seamless connectivity with our automation suites. I am also pleased with the continuous enhancements made to HeadSpin. There have been many features added since we started using the product, and all of them are useful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by saving money that would be spent on buying new devices."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"The integration is very good."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"The most valuable feature of HeadSpin it's the integration with other solutions. It is great. I can search for an element or do a quick debugging on the application right on HeadSpin. It's very useful."
"It has an interesting feature called AV box testing. A lot of companies that are in the OTT segment don't really understand what their streaming is like. They can't test for streaming quality. There are restrictions where you cannot simulate live streaming. For example, on Netflix, you can't simulate how a movie is being streamed on a remote device. That's why HeadSpin has got this AV box testing feature. It is a patented feature. They send an AV box to your location, and you can test live streaming, which is something that no other company does."
"The initial setup of HeadSpin was very easy and user-friendly. It was easy to configure and write a script."
"The most valuable feature is that this is the first connected intelligence all-in-one platform."
"The most valuable features of the product are the performance parameters it gives us."
"The technical support is really helpful because we can set up direct calls with them if we want to. We can use Zoom or Google Meet to interact with them directly, and if there is an issue in our system, they will help us by reproducing the issue in their machines and trying to figure out a solution. The support is really smooth, and we like that they're very supportive."
 

Cons

"My experience with pricing was that it was a bit on the higher side, around three hundred dollars per user per month, and I hoped it could be reduced."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"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."
"One improvement I observe is that iOS automation is not feasible due to some configuration issues, although it serves as a great tool for cross-browser testing."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"Support and pricing could be improved."
"They should automate their onboarding. A lot of things are still manual. They can create a video assistant or something like that to completely automate the entire process."
"HeadSpin could improve on the user interface because it is very poor. The checks that are done on the iOS devices are very difficult, but for Android, it runs great. For all iOS devices, the user interface and how it interacts with the device are very poor."
"If you want to do some testing or check the devices manually or check the application in a particular device manually, it is really laggy. That's a disappointment because sometimes we would like to do manual testing when our local devices are not available."
"HeadSpin needs to improve the hardware. With the mobile, the battery life reduces and must be continuously charged."
"Sometimes, devices go offline and some features are not functioning on some devices, specifically on iOS."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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 of BrowserStack is high."
"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 is fine."
"We have a yearly license for 16 devices."
"It has a yearly license. There is no other option. It is expensive. There are a lot of other cheaper players in the market, but it is like a Mercedes. You pay an extra premium for it, but you get the benefits. I would love to see them come up with project-based costing. Companies that are low on funds or new-age can do with pricing that is easily digestible. They can give them a pricing model for three months. They can provide a startup package."
"I believe the licensing cost is cheap because it's a total solution, hardware, license and software."
"It's not cheap, but there are a few different packages and different prices for enterprises with different product versions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
University
5%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Zynga, Tinder, Pinterest, Akamai, Microsoft, Airbnb, Jam City, TMobile, Mozilla, CNN, Cognizant, Yahoo!, ebay, Quora, Walmart, Kohls, Telstra
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. HeadSpin and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.