CodeceptJS vs Selenium

Overview

Selenium

Stacks16.2K

Followers12.6K

Votes527

GitHub Stars33.6K

Forks8.6K

CodeceptJS

Stacks117

Followers217

Votes52

CodeceptJS vs Selenium: What are the differences?

CodeceptJS vs Selenium

CodeceptJS and Selenium are both popular tools used for web automation testing. While they share the same goal, there are some key differences between the two.

CodeceptJS: CodeceptJS is a modern end-to-end testing framework that combines the best of various testing libraries like WebDriverIO, Protractor, etc. It allows you to write tests using simple and intuitive APIs, providing an easy-to-understand syntax that needs minimal coding skills. CodeceptJS utilizes the page object pattern, making it easier to manage and maintain test code.
Selenium: Selenium, on the other hand, is a widely used open-source web browser automation tool. It provides a range of language bindings, including Java, C#, Python, etc. Selenium offers a more traditional approach to web automation testing, requiring developers to have a good understanding of programming and coding concepts.
Code Organization: CodeceptJS organizes tests using "actors," allowing you to define multiple actors with their own actions and interactions. This makes it easier to create more realistic test scenarios and handle complex user interactions. Selenium does not provide such a built-in concept of actors, requiring developers to manage test organization themselves.
Browser Support: CodeceptJS supports multiple browsers out of the box, including Chrome, Firefox, Safari, etc. It also supports headless browsers like Puppeteer. Selenium, being a more mature tool, has extensive browser support and compatibility and offers more advanced features like grid testing.
Test Writing: CodeceptJS promotes a more human-readable style of test writing, using simple keywords and phrases to define test steps. It provides various built-in helper methods and plugins, making the test writing process quicker and easier. On the other hand, Selenium requires developers to write more traditional code, with explicit method calls and conversions.
Integrated Testing: CodeceptJS offers built-in support for functional, acceptance, and API testing. It provides easy integration with popular testing frameworks like Mocha, Jasmine, etc., allowing you to perform end-to-end testing effortlessly. Selenium focuses primarily on web browser automation and requires additional frameworks or tools for API testing.

In Summary, CodeceptJS provides a more simplified and powerful approach to web automation testing, with its intuitive syntax, actor-based organization, and integrated testing capabilities. Selenium, on the other hand, offers a more traditional approach with extensive browser support and flexibility.

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

Advice on Selenium, CodeceptJS

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

Selenium	CodeceptJS
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.	It is a modern end to end testing framework with a special BDD-style syntax. The test is written as a linear scenario of user's action on a site. Each test is described inside a Scenario function with I object passed into it.
-	Behavior Driven Development; Acceptance Testing; Data Driven Tests
Statistics
GitHub Stars 33.6K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 8.6K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 16.2K	Stacks 117
Followers 12.6K	Followers 217
Votes 527	Votes 52
Pros & Cons
Pros 177 Automates browsers 154 Testing 101 Essential tool for running test automation 24 Record-Playback 24 Remote Control Cons 8 Flaky tests 4 Slow as needs to make browser (even with no gui) 2 Update browser drivers	Pros 10 Readability 9 Full browser control 9 Cross browser support 8 Open source 6 Community Cons 2 Small community 1 Not a framework by itself
Integrations
No integrations available	JavaScript SilverStripe Wallaby.js MockIt (open source) Glamorous Majestic GUI

What are some alternatives to Selenium, CodeceptJS?

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.

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.

Mocha

Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases.

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.

Jasmine

Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run.

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.

Jest

Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

Cypress

Cypress is a front end automated testing application created for the modern web. Cypress is built on a new architecture and runs in the same run-loop as the application being tested. As a result Cypress provides better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser. Cypress works on any front-end framework or website.

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 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.

Related Comparisons

CodeceptJS vs Selenium: What are the differences?

CodeceptJS vs Selenium

CodeceptJS and Selenium are both popular tools used for web automation testing. While they share the same goal, there are some key differences between the two.

CodeceptJS: CodeceptJS is a modern end-to-end testing framework that combines the best of various testing libraries like WebDriverIO, Protractor, etc. It allows you to write tests using simple and intuitive APIs, providing an easy-to-understand syntax that needs minimal coding skills. CodeceptJS utilizes the page object pattern, making it easier to manage and maintain test code.
Selenium: Selenium, on the other hand, is a widely used open-source web browser automation tool. It provides a range of language bindings, including Java, C#, Python, etc. Selenium offers a more traditional approach to web automation testing, requiring developers to have a good understanding of programming and coding concepts.
Code Organization: CodeceptJS organizes tests using "actors," allowing you to define multiple actors with their own actions and interactions. This makes it easier to create more realistic test scenarios and handle complex user interactions. Selenium does not provide such a built-in concept of actors, requiring developers to manage test organization themselves.
Browser Support: CodeceptJS supports multiple browsers out of the box, including Chrome, Firefox, Safari, etc. It also supports headless browsers like Puppeteer. Selenium, being a more mature tool, has extensive browser support and compatibility and offers more advanced features like grid testing.
Test Writing: CodeceptJS promotes a more human-readable style of test writing, using simple keywords and phrases to define test steps. It provides various built-in helper methods and plugins, making the test writing process quicker and easier. On the other hand, Selenium requires developers to write more traditional code, with explicit method calls and conversions.
Integrated Testing: CodeceptJS offers built-in support for functional, acceptance, and API testing. It provides easy integration with popular testing frameworks like Mocha, Jasmine, etc., allowing you to perform end-to-end testing effortlessly. Selenium focuses primarily on web browser automation and requires additional frameworks or tools for API testing.

CodeceptJS vs Selenium

Overview

CodeceptJS vs Selenium: What are the differences?