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

Selenium HQ vs SmartBear TestComplete 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.6
Selenium HQ reduces testing time, achieves 60% ROI, requires Java developers, and improves efficiency up to 55% in a week.
Sentiment score
6.7
SmartBear TestComplete automation saves time, enhances client satisfaction, and boosts efficiency, with annual savings of approximately $10,000.
Once set up, only one person is needed to handle all tasks, reducing the requirement for multiple personnel.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Selenium HQ offers no direct support; users rely on community forums and online resources for assistance with issues.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete's customer support is knowledgeable but inconsistent, with delays and unresolved issues needing faster escalation and responses.
The marketplace community and forums are what we browse and look after, and we have found solutions whenever we tried to find anything.
I have not had the need to escalate questions to Selenium HQ tech support recently, as open community support is widely available and has been sufficient for our needs.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Selenium HQ is scalable with technical expertise, enabling parallel testing, but scalability varies by framework design.
Sentiment score
7.3
SmartBear TestComplete is scalable and adaptable, with flexible scripting, but may require licensing for wider deployment.
We can execute thousands of test cases weekly, and our automation coverage using Selenium HQ is approximately eighty-five percent.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Selenium HQ is generally stable but faces issues with Internet Explorer and new browsers needing maintenance and proper test architecture.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete generally stable, but users report crashes, memory leaks, and HTML5 testing delays in certain scenarios.
Selenium HQ is a scalable solution; it has been in production for the last two years, but I have been working on it for the last six years, so it is definitely scalable.
 

Room For Improvement

Users want better browser support, integration, simplified setup, clearer documentation, auto-healing, AJAX improvement, and frequent updates.
SmartBear TestComplete faces challenges in object recognition, integrations, licensing, performance, and support across browsers and mobile devices.
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.
I don't know if we have that capability to provide different data sources such as SQL Server, CSV, or maybe some other databases, so that kind of capability would be great.
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature.
 

Setup Cost

Selenium is open-source and free, but setup and maintenance may require investment in developer skills and expertise.
SmartBear TestComplete's pricing and licensing receive mixed reviews, seen as both reasonable and costly depending on usage and modules.
 

Valuable Features

Selenium HQ offers cost-free, open-source cross-browser testing, supports multiple languages, frameworks, and facilitates integration with CI tools.
SmartBear TestComplete excels in cross-platform automation, integration, and support for multiple languages, enhancing automated testing efficiency and maintenance.
Selenium HQ supports multiple browsers via grid hosting and offers dynamic configuration setup for testing across Chrome, Edge, and Internet Explorer.
When we were doing these tests manually, it took several hours of effort, and those hours, when counted on the basis of person days, used to be maybe six or seven months of effort, which we can now do every day by running the pipeline.
The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality.
 

Categories and Ranking

Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.7%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Selenium HQ vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.