This special video shows the differences between QF‑Test and Selenium

More about Web Testing

Comparing the features of the testing tools:

Selenium vs. QF-Test

Setup and ProgrammingSelenium requires good development skills to be able to configure Selenium IDE and the Selenium server.There is already a big difference in the Setup and Programming, because testers usually don't have the technical expertise to set up development environments. This is different at QF-Test: Non-developers can work with the tool, easily and quickly.
Supported technologiesSelenium just functions for web applications.With regard to supported technologies QF-Test supports. Java, Web, Windows and hybrid applications are not a problem.
Target groupSelenium requires programming skills and is accordingly primary addressed to developers. Selenium doesn't have an intuitive design.The target group of QF-Test are testers as well as developers
Capture and replaySelenium just captures actions and checks via Firefox plugin, however, the editing of captured steps is limited. Moreover Selenium IDE is just developed further reluctantly.QF-Test can impress with regard to capture and replay: The capture of actions and checks and the direct editing of the captured steps belong to the basic functionalities of QF-Test.
Object identificationThere is a big disadvantage of Selenium compared to QF-Test in object recognition: GUI-objects must be administered on code level and can only be administered centrally by the consistent use of special programming patterns.QF-Test recognizes components through fixed IDs of the GUI objects or a multi-level and customizable detection algorithm that is tolerant to element changes in the hierarchy.
Support of dynamic ids/AJAX
Test run analysis
Data driven testing
Selenium cannot do this.Dynamic ids and other non-deterministic AJAX component naming is supported out-of-the-box with QF-Test. And this is in addition to the built in test run analysis, reporting, debugging, maintainability and data driven testing.
ReusabilityTo be able to reuse Selenium tests you need special knowledge in object oriented programming.A modular and extensible design pattern is built in to QF-Test.
Extensive documentstion
Training and Consulting
Selenium doesn't offer this.A further advantage of QF-Test is its extensive documentation in English and German, the professional support and training consulting directly from the authors which isn’t offered like this at Selenium.
Backwarts compatibility
Selenium is very popular among developers.For this tool employees and solutions can be found due to the great community via online search, however there are often releases at Selenium that require the adaption of the test code, since backwarts compatibility is not part of the main objectives of this tool.QF-Test is in use at 1,400 clients in more than 60 countries worldwide and it focuses on backwarts compatibility of older versions.
Modular stuctureYou can work with Selenium very modularly and integrate unit tests.QF-Test brings a sophisticated component management innately in addition to modular and an integrion of unit tests, while an individual solution must be developed when using Selenium.

"After two mayor versions we abandoned Selenium due to this high maintenance effort."
learn more

Attila Enez, Tester

Hamburger Pensionsverwaltung, Hamburg, Deutschland

"I find it is a shame that my technical peers never experienced the productivity gains we experienced using your product (QF-Test). Many have difficulties envisioning a painless Test Automation experience.

They 'know' that Test Automation is extremely hard and expensive since all they ever used were Selenium and other wrapper tools around Selenium that require some programming knowledge. Your product could be a game changer in so many organizations."

Liviu-Aurelian Rau-Neascu, Senior Technical Analyst

Bucharest, Romania

QF‑Test and Selenium

Which one fits to my team and our requirements best?

  • Instead of an either-or-question we recommend using the benefits of both tools. With Selenium (or the extension Selenium IDE) you can you can, for example, work when dialogues play a minor role in the system test. However, QF-Test is better suited for dialogues.
  • Also you can only use Web tests with Selenium in Firefox (playback is also possible in several browsers). QF-Test further more supports additional browsers for web tests (Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, Microsoft Edge (Chromium based) and Internet Explorer; also 64bit) as well as the headless browser versions of Chrome, Firefox and Edge (Chromium based) and is easier to handle for testers.
  • You can even integrate your existing Java based Selenium tests in QF-Test and since QF-Test version 4.1 develop combined Selenium/QF-Test tests. Whenever bugs occur testers and developers can communicate quickly and have a common basis for the same target of a high quality software.

Why should I pay for a commercial tool instead of using a freeware tool?

The tool price is only a small part of the test project costs. The main part is the personnel costs, i.e. the effectiveness with which tests can be implemented and maintained is the most decisive factor. This is not taken into account in the pure tool price consideration. In addition, the test tool pays for itself after approximately 3 test cycles. Further information on testautomation and ROI

Answer other possible questions with you however yourself....