No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Selenium HQ vs TestingWhiz comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
TestingWhiz
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
24th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.3%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestingWhiz is 1.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Selenium HQ4.3%
TestingWhiz1.0%
Other94.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
VS
Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies
Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a scalable solution."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc., and you can also connect to a database using your JVC to read and write the data, so it's scalable and you can make any custom function."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"I like its simplicity."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"The most valuable feature I have found is the bomb file and it is easy in its coding."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."
 

Cons

"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"Selenium has problems with some objects."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"Selenium has been giving us failures sometimes. It is not working one hundred percent of the time when we are creating elements. They need to improve the stability of the solution."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"It would be nice to see more frequent releases and more bug fixes."
"Some improvements can be implemented as compared to Playwright, which is why I rate it seven out of ten."
"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%."
"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"The product is open-source and free."
"Selenium is an open-source product. It is free."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise52
No data available
 

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 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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?
It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.
What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?
Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...
What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.
 

Also Known As

SeleniumHQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: October 2026.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.