When companies start comparing good test automation tools for web tests, often the following question occur:
What is the difference between QF‑Test and the freeware Selenium? Which one fits to my team and our requirements best?

Web test automation for testers AND developers

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

More about Web Testing

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), Microsoft Edge Legacy 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.

Usually a much more important question occurs shortly afterwards: Why should I pay for a commercial tool instead of using a freeware tool?

This question can be answered fast...

Comparing the features of the testing tools:
Selenium vs. QF-Test

  • 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. Selenium requires good development skills to be able to configure Selenium IDE and the Selenium server. This is different at QF-Test: Non-developers can work with the tool, easily and quickly.
  • With regard to supported technologies QF-Test supports. Java, Web and hybrid applications are not a problem. Selenium just functions for web applications.
  • The target group of QF-Test are testers as well as developers. Selenium requires programming skills and is accordingly primary addressed to developers. Selenium doesn't have an intuitive design.
  • 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. Selenium just captures actions and checks via Firefox plugin, however, the editing of captured steps is limited. Moreover Selenium IDE is just developed further reluctantly.
  • There 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.
  • 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.
  • To 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.
  • 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.
  • Furthermore you can integrate the existing Java based Selenium tests directly in QF-Test and even develop combined Selenium/QF-Test tests since QF-Test version 4.1.
  • 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.
  • You can work with QF-Test as well as Selenium very modularly and integrate unit tests. QF-Test brings a sophisticated component management innately, while an individual solution must be developed when using Selenium.

I find it is a shame that my technical peers never experienced the productivity gains we experienced using your product. 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

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

Attila Enez, Tester

Hamburger Pensionsverwaltung, Hamburg, Deutschland

Performance for testers
Software testers
Security for developers
GUI developers
Advantages for deciders
Deciders