StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Testing Frameworks
  4. Browser Testing
  5. Karma vs WebdriverIO

Karma vs WebdriverIO

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Karma
Karma
Stacks4.8K
Followers603
Votes181
GitHub Stars12.0K
Forks1.7K
WebdriverIO
WebdriverIO
Stacks426
Followers509
Votes40
GitHub Stars9.7K
Forks2.6K

Karma vs WebdriverIO: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the world of web development, two popular tools for testing web applications are Karma and WebdriverIO. While both of them serve the same purpose of testing web applications, there are some key differences between them that make each tool unique and suitable for different scenarios.

  1. Test Runner vs. Automation Framework: Karma is primarily a test runner, which means it executes tests in the browser environment. It focuses on running unit tests and provides features like test frameworks, test reporter, and code coverage. On the other hand, WebdriverIO is an automation framework that allows you to automate browser interactions and perform end-to-end testing. It provides a wide range of APIs for browser automation and supports various testing frameworks.

  2. Testing Levels: Karma is mainly suitable for unit testing, where it executes tests at a lower level, typically focusing on individual functions, modules, or units of code. It facilitates running tests in browsers and provides tools for testing JavaScript code. In contrast, WebdriverIO is more oriented towards end-to-end testing, where tests are executed at a higher level, simulating user interactions with the application in a real browser environment.

  3. Testing Scope: Karma is primarily designed for testing JavaScript code in isolation, allowing you to test individual components or modules in an isolated manner. It provides a clean sandboxed environment for testing. On the other hand, WebdriverIO allows you to test the entire web application as a whole, including interactions between different components and modules. It simulates real user interactions and validates the application's behavior as a complete system.

  4. Browser Compatibility: Karma supports multiple browsers, allowing you to run tests in various browser environments simultaneously or sequentially. It provides easy configuration for launching and controlling different browsers. In contrast, WebdriverIO supports a wide range of browsers through Selenium WebDriver or WebDriver protocol. It allows you to control browsers programmatically and perform cross-browser testing.

  5. Concurrency and Parallel Execution: Karma executes tests in a sequential manner, one after the other, by default. However, it also provides options for running tests concurrently in multiple browser instances. On the other hand, WebdriverIO supports parallel execution of tests out of the box. It can distribute the tests across multiple browser instances, enabling faster and efficient test execution.

  6. Community and Ecosystem: Karma has been around for a longer time and has a larger user base and community support. It has a well-established ecosystem with a wide range of plugins, frameworks, and tools integrated with it. WebdriverIO, although relatively newer, also has a growing community and ecosystem. It provides extensive documentation, integrations with various frameworks, and plugins for enhancing the testing capabilities.

In summary, Karma is a test runner focused on unit testing JavaScript code in browsers, while WebdriverIO is an automation framework tailored for end-to-end testing and browser automation. Karma is more suitable for isolated JavaScript testing, whereas WebdriverIO is ideal for simulating user interactions and testing the complete web application. The choice between the two depends on the testing requirements and the scope of the application being tested.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Karma, WebdriverIO

Esther
Esther

Feb 16, 2020

Needs adviceonreact-testing-libraryreact-testing-library

Hi, I am starting out to test an application that is currently being developed - FE: React. BE: Node JS. I want the framework to be able to test all UI scenarios (from simple to complex) and also have the capability to test APIs. I also need to run tests across all OSs and Browsers (Windows, Mac, Android, iOS). I have also looked into react-testing-library and @TestProject.io. Any advice you can give as to which framework would be best and why would be so much appreciated! Thank you!!

96.5k views96.5k
Comments
Shivam
Shivam

Mar 5, 2020

Needs advice

we are having one web application developed in Reacts.js. in the application, we have only 4 to 5 pages that we need to test. I am having experience in selenium with java. Please suggets which tool I should use. and why ............................ ............................ .............................

241k views241k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Karma
Karma
WebdriverIO
WebdriverIO

Karma is not a testing framework, nor an assertion library. Karma just launches a HTTP server, and generates the test runner HTML file you probably already know from your favourite testing framework. So for testing purposes you can use pretty much anything you like.

WebdriverIO lets you control a browser or a mobile application with just a few lines of code. Your test code will look simple, concise and easy to read.

Test on Real Devices;Remote Control;Testing Framework Agnostic;Open Source;Easy Debugging;Continuous Integration
Extendable; Support for the WebDriver specification as well as to Appium; Easy Test Setup; Run tests on desktop and mobile, Command line interface
Statistics
GitHub Stars
12.0K
GitHub Stars
9.7K
GitHub Forks
1.7K
GitHub Forks
2.6K
Stacks
4.8K
Stacks
426
Followers
603
Followers
509
Votes
181
Votes
40
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 61
    Test Runner
  • 35
    Open source
  • 27
    Continuous Integration
  • 22
    Great for running tests
  • 18
    Test on Real Devices
Cons
  • 1
    Slow, because tests are run in a real browser
  • 1
    Requires the use of hacks to find tests dynamically
Pros
  • 11
    Various integrations to vendors like Sauce Labs
  • 10
    Open Source
  • 8
    Great community
  • 7
    Easy to setup
  • 4
    Best solution for broad browser support
Cons
  • 8
    High maintenance
Integrations
Jasmine
Jasmine
Mocha
Mocha
Node.js
Node.js
Selenium
Selenium

What are some alternatives to Karma, WebdriverIO?

BrowserStack

BrowserStack

BrowserStack is the leading test platform built for developers & QAs to expand test coverage, scale & optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability.

Selenium

Selenium

Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well.

Sauce Labs

Sauce Labs

Cloud-based automated testing platform enables developers and QEs to perform functional, JavaScript unit, and manual tests with Selenium or Appium on web and mobile apps. Videos and screenshots for easy debugging. Secure and CI-ready.

LambdaTest

LambdaTest

LambdaTest platform provides secure, scalable and insightful test orchestration for website, and mobile app testing. Customers at different points in their DevOps lifecycle can leverage Automation and/or Manual testing on LambdaTest.

Playwright

Playwright

It is a Node library to automate the Chromium, WebKit and Firefox browsers with a single API. It enables cross-browser web automation that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast.

Rainforest QA

Rainforest QA

Rainforest gives you the reliability of a QA team and the speed of automation, without the hassle of managing a team or the pain of writing automated tests.

TestingBot

TestingBot

TestingBot provides automated and Manual cross browser testing in the cloud. Make sure your website looks ok in all browsers.

Ghost Inspector

Ghost Inspector

It lets you create and manage UI tests that check specific functionality in your website or application. We execute these automated browser tests continuously from the cloud and alert you if anything breaks.

Selenide

Selenide

It is a library for writing concise, readable, boilerplate-free tests in Java using Selenium WebDriver.

Autify

Autify

It is a software testing automation platform powered by AI. Autify helps in creating the Quality Assurance team to deliver the best version of their product in record time.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana