Introducing
The Slant team built an AI & it’s awesome
Find the best product instantly
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now
4.7 star rating
0
What is the best alternative to Puppeteer?
Ad
Ad
BugBug.io
All
3
Experiences
Pros
3
Top
Pro
Reusable components
You are able to group the steps in tests into reusable components to manage and repair them easier. As a bonus, you can see all test flows on a single project graph.
See More
Top
Pro
Great UI & UX
A design for a high efficiency
See More
Top
Pro
Debuggability
You can run tests and debug directly from a Chrome browser, where you have access to DevTools.
See More
Hide
€0 ; €69 ; €149 ; €299
5
0
CasperJS
All
7
Experiences
Pros
5
Cons
2
Top
Pro
Allows screenshots (either the full page or parts of it) if performing UI testing
There are times where you don't want to open up a browser for screencaps, that is where CasperJS comes to use, it can render the page using its own rendering engine and take and save a screenshot for you, all via the commandline
See More
Top
Con
Not for unit testing but rather UI testing
These are two extremely different concepts. CasperJS should be removed from this list
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to understand
See More
Top
Con
Cannot guarantee 100% accurate Webkit-based browser screenshots
QtWebKit is the rendering engine used by CasperJS. Keep in mind this is NOT the same rendering engine as Chrome; hence, if you want to be 100% sure of the results, you must run a Webkit browser (such as Chrome) yourself.
See More
Top
Pro
Written in JavaScript
Since all webdevs know JS, the start-up time of learning the framework will be reduced to zero, as your team can be productive from day one.
See More
Top
Pro
Easily integrates with other applications
Due to the simplicity of the framework, not only other libraries can be built with it, but it can be integrated with any web application as well.
See More
Top
Pro
Can run javascript code inside pages being tested
Can execute arbitrary javascript or load external JS into the page being tested. This feature is possible due to the presence of a rendering engine, and helps you see the effects of any client side scripting during your tests.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
15
3
Endtest
All
13
Experiences
Pros
9
Cons
4
Top
Pro
Codeless automated testing
Endtest allows you to create automated tests for web applications, directly on their cloud infrastructure. No coding skills are required. You can also choose the action "Execute Javascript" for a more flexible test run.
See More
Top
Con
Doesn't support a wide array of browsers and/or operating systems
Because it's still in its infancy, it doesn't yet have a huge variety of browsers and operating systems.
See More
Top
Pro
Running your automated tests on their cloud infrastructure
You can easily run your automated tests on their platform, just by clicking the run button.
See More
Top
Con
Free plan has limited time storage for test suites
If you are using the free plan, keep in mind that the test suites created there are scheduled to be deleted after around 2 weeks. Endtest will send you a notification email the day before mentioning "Test suites from users who are not on the PRO Plan get automatically deleted after some time," and offering for you to upgrade to PRO.
See More
Top
Pro
Designed for Continuous Integration
It has an API which allows testers to run it on Jenkins or Team City. Other than that, it has a built-in test scheduler to allow testers to preset test executions.
See More
Top
Con
Codeless and locks you in rendering your efforts useless if you want to switch
See More
Top
Pro
Now supports mobile testing
Endtest has added a new feature which now supports mobile testing for both Android and iOS (.apk and .ipa).
See More
Top
Con
Bad UI
See More
Top
Pro
Option to export your automated tests in different formats, including .EXE
You can export your automated tests in a variety of different formats, and run them on your own infrastructure. The formats are either in Python file format or executable file format (.EXE).
See More
Top
Pro
Now supports a wider variety of browsers, operating system and devices
As of March 2018, Endtest can now support multiple platforms (Windows, MAC, Android and iOS), Operating Systems, and more than a handful of devices for both Android and iOS.
See More
Top
Pro
Super fast and affordable.
See More
Top
Pro
Premium version is relatively cheaper than most in the market
Their pricing plan ($79/month or $650/year) includes team plan upgrade, which means the whole team, regardless of the number of users, will only need to subscribe to the $79/month or $650/year plan. This includes unlimited test runs, test exports, recordings, etc.
See More
Top
Pro
It's mostly free to use
The free plan covers a lot, you can have up to 3 test suites, and you can run your automated tests as many times as you want. The pro plan includes some very advanced options that you might need only if you're working with a team (for example, the collaboration feature, schedule test run, API for Jenkins, etc.).
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Free
41
13
Nightwatch.js
All
6
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
2
Top
Pro
You don't have to choose a testing framework
Nightwatch solves the Paradox of Choice among testing frameworks such as Jasmine, Cucumber or Mocha+Chai, by including its own BDD-style assertion library, based on Chai.
See More
Top
Con
No official BDD-style syntax support
See More
Top
Pro
Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
See More
Top
Con
Includes its own testing framework / assertions library
Unlike WebdriverIO, which lets you use various test frameworks and assertion libraries (e.g. Jasmine, Cucumber, Mocha + Chai), Nightwatch comes with its own BDD-style interface for performing assertions, based on Chai. Here's a simple test example: module.exports = { 'Demo test Google' : function (browser) { browser .url('http://www.google.com') .waitForElementVisible('body', 1000) .setValue('input[type=text]', 'nightwatch') .waitForElementVisible('button[name=btnG]', 1000) .click('button[name=btnG]') .pause(1000) .assert.containsText('#main', 'Night Watch') .end(); } };
See More
Top
Pro
Test organization is out of the box
Supports page object model, custom commands, custom assertions, and globals.js.
See More
Top
Pro
3rd party integration with Cucumber
Though Cucumber is not officially supported, Nightwatch can be used with Cucumber.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
31
3
PhantomJS
All
8
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
4
Top
Con
Deprecated by Puppeteer
PhantomJS is no longer actively maintained by the original authors. Puppeteer is said to be a replacement supported and backed by the Google Chrome team, now.
See More
Top
Pro
Supports screen capture
See More
Top
Con
Heavy setup
You'll often end up having PhantomJS binaries connected via WebDriver to your testing framework, possibly using client/server especially if you want your test running with something else than Java. This means an overhead in terms of maintenance and performance, but still usually lighter than running a full browser (like Chrome, Firefox, IE).
See More
Top
Pro
Used in many open source projects
Including bootstrap, grunt, ember.js, and YUI.
See More
Top
Con
Browser closes unexpectedly
It often happens when running on more then 5 (my measurement) JVM instances that the browser gets stuck and quits unexpectedly. This can be partially solved by running the instances one by one instead of parallel (this is a problem when testing Jenkins and Bamboo agents) but I don't believe this qualifies as a solution. The error is called UnreachableBrowserException.
See More
Top
Pro
Supports many browser standards
PhantomJS has full DOM and CSS parsing, JSON, canvas, and SVG support.
See More
Top
Con
Elements are sometimes not visible
This is an error which occurs with almost no reason, PhantomJS sometimes decides that it cannot click the element even though the element is intractable or enabled. This happens if you have to scroll to see the element (and these are not pages that load elements with JavaScript) which is strange because PhantomJS should catch the whole page if it is not loaded explicitly with JavaScript. This problem partially goes away with re-sizing the browser, but that does not really qualify as a solution. The error it raises is: ElementNotVisibleException.
See More
Top
Pro
Built on WebKit
WebKit is becoming the gold standard for browser compatibility, making it a good starting point for native headless browser testing.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
47
5
Cypress
All
7
Experiences
Pros
4
Cons
3
Top
Pro
Web UI to develop tests quickly
You can edit your test code in the browser and instantly see it run as you change the code.
See More
Top
Con
Doesn't support Safari
See More
Top
Pro
Easy to record a video
It can easily record a video so you can understand what happened when a test failed in your CI.
See More
Top
Con
Single tab only
Does not and will not support multiple tabs or multiple simultaneous browsers. See https://docs.cypress.io/guides/references/trade-offs.html#Permanent-trade-offs-1
See More
Top
Pro
Amazing dashboard to view reports and recordings
The Cypress dashboard allows you to see every run on a great UI linked to commits and gitflow.
See More
Top
Con
Heavy in setup
Do not add Cypress in the main repo. Have a specific test repo for it or you will be sorry when the CI/CD flow takes 5-6 min longer every build due to installation time of Cypress.
See More
Top
Pro
Cross Browser testing
https://docs.cypress.io/guides/guides/cross-browser-testing.html Chrome Firefox Edge Electron Brave
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
59
8
WebdriverIO
All
13
Experiences
Pros
10
Cons
3
Top
Pro
Works with any testing framework or assertion library
WebdriverIO lets you use your favorite testing framework (Jasmine, Mocha, Cucumber) and assertion library (Chai for Mocha). Other projects implement their own testing and assertion APIs, for example Nightwatch, Intern. It should be mentioned though that v4.2.16 has an incompatibility with at least tap v7.1.2: stdout/stderr written during a run gets lost.
See More
Top
Con
Must run with WDIO to debug
Tasks written in this beautiful Selenium API can only be debugged using the provided WDIO task runner. You can't set breakpoints within tasks, but you can have WDIO pause the run between Selenium commands.
See More
Top
Pro
Used by Chimp.js
Chimp.js, is an emerging web application test framework that implements easy sync tests using WebdriverIO, CucumberJS and Chai. Features include: synchronous style built-in "widget framework" (an implementation of the PageObject pattern) automatically downloads dependencies (ChromeDriver, PhantomJS etc.) works with SauceLabs and BrowserStack (CrossBrowserTesting TBD) automatically takes screenshots on failures works on Windows in addition to Linux and OS X automatically produces boilerplate code for step definitions, which you can copy, paste and edit file watcher reuses the browser sessions and can run only the tests you tag, to maximize development speed
See More
Top
Con
Selenium server must be started independently
selenium-webdriverjs starts the Selenium server automatically, and actually manages to achieve a faster startup time (4 seconds vs. 5.5) than WebdriverIO.
See More
Top
Pro
Excellent API documentation
See More
Top
Con
Have no docs for latest version (4.0.5)
See More
Top
Pro
Synchronous implementation of asynchronous browser commands
So you don't need to worry about promises
See More
Top
Pro
Config file generation wizard
Run wdio config and WebdriverIO will generate a config file for testing locally vs. in the cloud, specifying the test framework (Jasmine, Cucumber, Mocha), where to find tests and store screenshots etc.
See More
Top
Pro
Allows you to do visual regression tests using WebdriverCSS
WebdriverIO has a plugin called WebdriverCSS that allows you to do cross visual platfrom/browser tests with an integration to Applitools.
See More
Top
Pro
Provides plugins for gulp, grunt and other
WebdriverIO is accessible via gulp and grunt and even has a Sublime Text plugin for autocompletion.
See More
Top
Pro
Simpler syntax than selenium-webdriverjs and WD.js
selenium-webdriverjs: driver.get('http://www.google.com'); driver.findElement(webdriver.By.id('q')).sendKeys('webdriver'); driver.findElement(webdriver.By.id('btnG')).click(); WD.js: browser .get("http://www.google.com") .elementById('q') .sendKeys('webdriver') .elementById('btnG') .click() WebdriverIO: client .url('http://google.com') .setValue('#q','webdriver') .click('#btnG')
See More
Top
Pro
Used by Meteor's Velocity test runner
If you develop web applications with Meteor.js, you might want to use the xlovio:webdriver wrapper, because it's the Selenium binding behind the preferred testing framework (Chimp) promoted by the Velocity (Meteor's official testing framework) team for using BDD via Cucumber.
See More
Top
Pro
Selenium Server need not be started independently
Service is provided by WebdriverIO which over comes the con of starting selenium server independently. Reference: http://webdriver.io/guide/services/selenium-standalone.html
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
40
9
Zombie.js
All
7
Experiences
Pros
3
Cons
4
Top
Pro
Runs on Node.js
Zombie is built on node.js, making it very easy to integrate with your project and into your testing toolchain. It only requires JavaScript to run.
See More
Top
Con
Support has waned
As of August 19, 2016, Zombie hasn't received a commit since January 2016. Issues get comments like "patch welcome".
See More
Top
Pro
Fully featured api based interaction and assertion
The way the api is built makes it very easy to add to your test framework.
See More
Top
Con
Stale documentation
Full API documentation has been missing since the start, making it frustrating to use.
See More
Top
Pro
Claims to be "Insanely Fast"
It's a lot faster than fully fletched browsers and a lot lighter. Partly because it really only focuses on headless loading of pages along with their JavaScript (not taking really care of rendering or more visual resources).
See More
Top
Con
Fails to load many sites
As its JavaScript and DOM engine are mostly "just good enough" and because by design it'll report all errors and stop there, many complex sites will not load properly through Zombie.js.
See More
Top
Con
No screen-shot
As it doesn't render the page, you cannot get a screenshot to for testing or reporting test failures.
See More
Hide
See All
Experiences
Get it
here
7
3
NW.js (w/xvfb)
All
4
Experiences
Pros
2
Cons
1
Specs
Top
Pro
Node integration
The integration of Node with the DOM in NW.js opens up a number of new options in how your headless testing workflow can be facilitated. The distinct separation of JavaScript contexts, the introduction of a separate node context, and the ability to cross communicate, offers a lot of power and flexibility.
See More
Top
Con
xvfb Requirement (for now)
Headless is on the NW.js roadmap, but for now xvfb is necessary to get going. The community has done the work and you can find the details here.
See More
Top
Pro
NaCl support/integration
Access to the Native Client offers up more options in implementing your testing workflow.
See More
Specs
Supported languages:
JS, [third party modules:C#,C++Web Assembly]
Integrated Debugger:
SDK version
Hide
Get it
here
18
0
Firefox Developer Tools
All
4
Experiences
Pros
3
Specs
Top
Pro
Page inspector
Particularly strong with inspecting the new CSS Grid layouts.
See More
Top
Pro
Effective for identifying CSS styles in use on an element and testing different styles
Identifying the font in use is one thing Firefox's Developer Tools panel does particularly well, and which Chrome's Developer Tools panel doesn't do.
See More
Top
Pro
Debugger
Debugger is useful and informative.
See More
Specs
Platforms:
Windows, Linux, Mac
Hide
Get it
here
6
0
Chrome DevTools
All
3
Experiences
Pros
1
Cons
2
Top
Con
Limited to the box model of elements
DevTools only displays measurements of the HTML element's box that means that it can't measure, for example, relative to text's baseline or objects within a canvas element.
See More
Top
Pro
No need for a separate tool
Chrome comes with DevTools baked in. So if Chrome is used for development and it fills the need, there's no need for a separate tool.
See More
Top
Con
Does not measure distance between elements
DevTools measure dimensions of HTML elements only.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
14
1
QUnit
All
4
Experiences
Pros
3
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Tests run in the order they're added to the suite
In cases where you want (I know your test cases must be atomic) where you really really want your test cases to run in a specific order, maybe if the current one rely on those of previous case, you can use Qunit by setting QUnit.config.reorder = false and your test cases will run in the order you've provided.
See More
Top
Con
Testing of Async operations can be a little tough at times.
Qunit, expects us to call the start() function before the Async function itself, and stop() after it stops. This can be a problem when you have no way of knowing, when your function will start or stop (your testing a number of dependent functions)
See More
Top
Pro
Works really well if performing DOM Testing
All frontend developers already know the ease that jQuery framework has brought to their lives, in handling DOM events and accessing elements. Since Qunit was built as a part of jquery (is even used by jQuery itself for unit testing) hence it makes testing of DOM elements a lot easier.
See More
Top
Pro
Extremely easy to start from scratch
Seriously! All you have to do is include the Qunit library from the CDN, then create your Testcases js file, and RUN IT! . Your outputs would be displayed in a pretty little format in your browser.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
8
5
Geb
All
3
Experiences
Pros
2
Cons
1
Top
Pro
Easy integration with build systems
It's very easy to integrate Geb with any build system.
See More
Top
Con
Low IDE support
There are not many IDEs that support Geb.
See More
Top
Pro
Asynchronous requests testing is a easier
Asynchronous web pages can easily be tested with Geb as it has built in, easy to use support for testing such operations.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
1
1
unobtainium
All
3
Experiences
Pros
3
Top
Pro
Extensible
Custom drivers for e.g. API testing or static HTML testing exist and are easily built. Driver modules allow you to extend the main driver (e.g. Selenium or Appium) with ease.
See More
Top
Pro
Platform agnostic because it is configuration driven
For test suites crossing multiple platforms, selecting the test target platform can be driven entirely by configuration.
See More
Top
Pro
Seamlessly automate mobile and desktop browsers
Based on either Appium or Selenium, the API remains largely the same when switching between different platforms.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
0
1
Built By the Slant team
Find the best product instantly.
4.7 star rating
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now - it's free
{}
undefined
url next
price drop