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

LambdaTest vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 27, 2025

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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (8th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.5%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.3%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
LambdaTest4.5%
Selenium HQ3.3%
Other92.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KK
Practice Specialist at a government with 1-10 employees
Cloud-based testing has simplified remote mobile validation and provides flexible device coverage
I was not impressed with how detailed their analytics and logs are from LambdaTest. The solution we were testing is being used because many of us are working from home. It was easy to implement because with a real phone, we have to bring a real phone to each person. Since three years ago, many employees have been working from home, so we were trying to find a solution for this challenge. We had no need to exploit the information for the analytics generated in the background. The purpose was simply to make it easy for our employees to access a phone. The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers. The contrast on a real iPhone provides better contrast than with the cloud solution. The only aspect that was less favorable than on a real phone was the contrast of the color.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Manager consultant - Digital assurance Services at adrosonic
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 real devices feature is the most valuable feature for us."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"LambdaTest is easy to use, and the documentation provides all the needed information."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"It is stable. I have never encountered any concerning situations with Selenium HQ."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"Some of the most valuable features of this solution are open-source, they have good support, good community support, and it supports multiple languages whether you use C-Sharp or not. These are some of the most important benefits."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
"I like its simplicity."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"It's not too complicated to implement."
 

Cons

"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"Their smart testing module needs improvement."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%."
"The solution could be improved regarding communication with browsers, as it is slower and a bit tricky compared to other frameworks. However, with the latest changes involving BiDirectional communication, it is becoming a top choice in automation frameworks."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"It is affordable as compared to similar SaaS solutions."
"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"This is an affordable product."
"The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"It is an open-source solution."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"The pricing is open source."
"It is free to use."
"It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
"It is all free."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"The setup cost is open source or free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
I was not impressed with how detailed their analytics and logs are from LambdaTest. The solution we were testing is being used because many of us are working from home. It was easy to implement bec...
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
What needs improvement with Selenium HQ?
Some improvements can be implemented as compared to Playwright, which is why I rate it seven out of ten.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.