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

BrowserStack vs Telerik Test Studio 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)
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (14th), Regression Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 6.8%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BrowserStack6.8%
Telerik Test Studio1.7%
Other91.5%
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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Project Management at Capgemini
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"BrowserStack has helped us with automating our test cases by reducing the time by almost 60%."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"The integration is very good."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by ensuring that we don't have any surprises, especially on smaller devices."
"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."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
 

Cons

"We had some execution issues."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"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."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"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."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"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."
"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 is fine."
"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."
"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
8%
 

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
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.