Playwright vs Testim

Overview

Testim

Stacks34

Followers57

Votes0

Playwright

Stacks613

Followers586

Votes81

GitHub Stars79.0K

Forks4.8K

Playwright vs Testim: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Playwright and Testim are both powerful automation testing tools that allow developers to write and execute tests for web applications. While they serve a similar purpose, there are key differences between the two that make them unique in their own ways.

Browser Compatibility: Playwright supports multiple browsers including Chrome, Firefox, and Safari, allowing developers to run tests on different browsers effortlessly. On the other hand, Testim currently only supports Chrome, limiting the testing capabilities to one browser.
Programming Languages: Playwright supports multiple programming languages such as JavaScript, Python, and C#, allowing developers to write tests in their preferred language. Testim, however, primarily focuses on JavaScript, offering limited support for other programming languages.
Element Identification: Playwright provides robust mechanisms for element identification, including CSS selectors, XPath, text content, and more. This allows developers to easily locate and interact with elements on web pages. Testim, on the other hand, relies heavily on CSS selectors, which may not be as flexible or powerful in certain scenarios.
Parallel Execution: Playwright has built-in support for parallel test execution, enabling developers to run tests concurrently and significantly reduce the overall test execution time. Testim, on the other hand, does not have native parallel execution capabilities, which can impact the efficiency and speed of test execution.
Test Reporting and Analytics: Playwright provides detailed test reports and analytics, including screenshots, videos, and performance metrics, which helps in debugging and identifying issues quickly. Testim also offers test reporting and analytics features, but they may not be as comprehensive or customizable as Playwright.
Community and Support: Playwright has a growing community and good developer support, with active contributors and regular updates. Testim also has a supportive community but may not be as extensive or established as Playwright's community.

In summary, Playwright offers browser compatibility across multiple browsers, supports multiple programming languages, provides flexible element identification methods, has built-in parallel execution capabilities, offers comprehensive test reporting and analytics, and has a strong community and support. Testim, on the other hand, has limitations in terms of browser compatibility, programming language support, and parallel execution, while also lacking some advanced features in test reporting and analytics.

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)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Testim	Playwright
It uses artificial intelligence to speed-up the authoring, execution, and maintenance of automated tests.	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.
Super fast authoring; Machine learning based self-maintenance; Efficiency at scale; Fast, scalable test runs	Node library; Headless supported; Enables cross-browser web automation; Improved automated UI testing
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 79.0K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 4.8K
Stacks 34	Stacks 613
Followers 57	Followers 586
Votes 0	Votes 81
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 15 Cross browser 11 Open source 9 Test Runner with Playwright/test 7 Well documented 7 Promise based Cons 12 Less help 3 Node based 2 Does not execute outside of browser
Integrations
Travis CI GitHub Visual Studio Jira TeamCity Slack Codeship Trello Jenkins StrongLoop	No integrations available

What are some alternatives to Testim, Playwright?

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 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

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 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.

Karma

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.

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.

WebdriverIO

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.

Puppeteer

Puppeteer is a Node library which provides a high-level API to control headless Chrome over the DevTools Protocol. It can also be configured to use full (non-headless) Chrome.

TestingBot

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

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.

Related Comparisons

Playwright vs Testim: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Browser Compatibility: Playwright supports multiple browsers including Chrome, Firefox, and Safari, allowing developers to run tests on different browsers effortlessly. On the other hand, Testim currently only supports Chrome, limiting the testing capabilities to one browser.
Programming Languages: Playwright supports multiple programming languages such as JavaScript, Python, and C#, allowing developers to write tests in their preferred language. Testim, however, primarily focuses on JavaScript, offering limited support for other programming languages.
Element Identification: Playwright provides robust mechanisms for element identification, including CSS selectors, XPath, text content, and more. This allows developers to easily locate and interact with elements on web pages. Testim, on the other hand, relies heavily on CSS selectors, which may not be as flexible or powerful in certain scenarios.
Parallel Execution: Playwright has built-in support for parallel test execution, enabling developers to run tests concurrently and significantly reduce the overall test execution time. Testim, on the other hand, does not have native parallel execution capabilities, which can impact the efficiency and speed of test execution.
Test Reporting and Analytics: Playwright provides detailed test reports and analytics, including screenshots, videos, and performance metrics, which helps in debugging and identifying issues quickly. Testim also offers test reporting and analytics features, but they may not be as comprehensive or customizable as Playwright.
Community and Support: Playwright has a growing community and good developer support, with active contributors and regular updates. Testim also has a supportive community but may not be as extensive or established as Playwright's community.

Playwright vs Testim

Overview