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

BrowserStack vs Selenium HQ 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
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.7%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"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 most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."
"I do recommend Selenium HQ to other organizations because we are in a business that is primarily based on B2B interface."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
 

Cons

"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"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."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
"It takes such a long time to use this solution that it may be worth looking into other free solutions such as TestProject or Katalon Studio, or paid solutions to replace it."
"Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex."
"There is a challenge with concurrent testing, where parallelization is not fully supported."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"Selenium HQ could have better interaction with SAP products."
"​To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"The price is fine."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"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."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"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."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"It's open-source, so it's free."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
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.
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.
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.