Codecov vs Karma

Overview

Karma

Stacks4.8K

Followers603

Votes181

GitHub Stars12.0K

Forks1.7K

Codecov

Stacks2.8K

Followers325

Votes102

Codecov vs Karma: What are the differences?

What is Codecov? Hosted coverage reports with awesome features to enhance your CI workflow. Our patrons rave about our elegant coverage reports, integrated pull request comments, interactive commit graphs, our Chrome plugin and security.

What is Karma? Spectacular Test Runner for JavaScript. 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.

Codecov and Karma are primarily classified as "Code Coverage" and "Browser Testing" tools respectively.

Some of the features offered by Codecov are:

Beautiful Reports
Pull Request Comments
Interactive Commit Graphs

On the other hand, Karma provides the following key features:

Test on Real Devices
Remote Control
Testing Framework Agnostic

"More stable than coveralls" is the primary reason why developers consider Codecov over the competitors, whereas "Test Runner" was stated as the key factor in picking Karma.

Karma is an open source tool with 10.7K GitHub stars and 1.61K GitHub forks. Here's a link to Karma's open source repository on GitHub.

Typeform, Sellsuki, and Coderus are some of the popular companies that use Karma, whereas Codecov is used by Repro, ContentSquare, and homezen. Karma has a broader approval, being mentioned in 119 company stacks & 57 developers stacks; compared to Codecov, which is listed in 49 company stacks and 29 developer stacks.

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 Karma, Codecov

Felipe

May 24, 2020

Needs advice

My website is brand new and one of the few requirements of testings I had to implement was code coverage. Never though it was so hard to implement using a #docker container.
Given my lack of experience, every attempt I tried on making a simple code coverage test using the 4 combinations of #TravisCI, #CircleCi with #Coveralls, #Codecov I failed. The main problem was I was generating the .coverage file within the docker container and couldn't access it with #TravisCi or #CircleCi, every attempt to solve this problem seems to be very hacky and this was not the kind of complexity I want to introduce to my newborn website.
This problem was solved using a specific action for #GitHubActions, it was a 3 line solution I had to put in my github workflow file and I was able to access the .coverage file from my docker container and get the coverage report with #Codecov.

198k views198k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Karma	Codecov
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.	Our patrons rave about our elegant coverage reports, integrated pull request comments, interactive commit graphs, our Chrome plugin and security.
Test on Real Devices;Remote Control;Testing Framework Agnostic;Open Source;Easy Debugging;Continuous Integration	Beautiful Reports;Pull Request Comments;Interactive Commit Graphs;Chrome Extension;Github Commit Status;Easy to Integrate;Hipchat Integration
Statistics
GitHub Stars 12.0K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 1.7K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 4.8K	Stacks 2.8K
Followers 603	Followers 325
Votes 181	Votes 102
Pros & Cons
Pros 61 Test Runner 35 Open source 27 Continuous Integration 22 Great for running tests 18 Test on Real Devices Cons 1 Requires the use of hacks to find tests dynamically 1 Slow, because tests are run in a real browser	Pros 17 Easy setup 17 More stable than coveralls 14 GitHub integration 11 They reply their users 10 Easy setup,great ui Cons 1 GitHub org / team integration is a little too tight 0 Delayed results by hours since recent outage 0 Support does not respond to email
Integrations
Jasmine Mocha	HipChat Jenkins Bitbucket GitLab GitHub CircleCI Heroku

What are some alternatives to Karma, Codecov?

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.

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.

Coveralls

Coveralls works with your CI server and sifts through your coverage data to find issues you didn't even know you had before they become a problem. Free for open source, pro accounts for private repos, instant sign up with GitHub OAuth.

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.

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

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana