Cypress vs TestComplete

Overview

TestComplete

Stacks39

Followers60

Votes0

Cypress

Stacks3.5K

Followers2.0K

Votes115

GitHub Stars49.4K

Forks3.4K

Cypress vs TestComplete: What are the differences?

1. Execution Speed: Cypress is known for its fast execution speed as it runs directly within the browser and is able to control everything happening in the browser. On the other hand, TestComplete relies on external drivers to communicate with the browser, which can sometimes result in slower execution speed.
2. Architecture: Cypress follows a unique architecture where it runs directly in the browser and provides native access to the DOM, allowing real-time reloading and debugging. TestComplete, on the other hand, operates at a higher level and uses a separate client-server architecture for test execution.
3. Web Application Testing: Cypress is specifically designed for testing web applications and provides comprehensive support for modern web technologies like React, Angular, and Vue.js. TestComplete, on the other hand, is a more general-purpose testing tool that supports a wider range of applications, including desktop, mobile, and web.
4. Programming Language: Cypress uses JavaScript as its scripting language, making it easier for developers to adopt and integrate with their existing workflows. TestComplete supports multiple programming languages like JavaScript, Python, VBScript, etc., providing flexibility but requiring additional setup and knowledge of those languages.
5. Test Debugging: Cypress offers an intuitive and powerful built-in time-travel debugging feature, which allows developers to pause, step through, and inspect the state of their tests in real-time. TestComplete provides debugging capabilities as well but may require additional setup and configuration.
6. Community Support: Cypress has gained significant popularity in recent years, which has led to a growing and active community of developers who contribute to the ecosystem with plugins, documentation, and community support. TestComplete also has a community base, but it may not be as extensive and active as Cypress.

In Summary, Cypress is a faster, browser-centric testing tool specifically designed for web applications, with a strong community support, while TestComplete is a broader testing tool that supports various applications but may have a slower execution speed and require additional configurations.

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 TestComplete, Cypress

Dane

Feb 7, 2020

Needs adviceon

Cypress

Jest

As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.

836k views836k

Comments

Yildiz

testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice

May 12, 2020

Needs adviceon

AngularJS

TypeScript

Cypress

In the company I will be building test automation framework and my new company develops apps mainly using AngularJS/TypeScript. I was planning to build Protractor-Jasmine framework but a friend of mine told me about Cypress and heard that its users are very satisfied with it. I am trying to understand the capabilities of Cypress and as the final goal to differentiate these two tools. Can anyone advice me on this in a nutshell pls...

277k views277k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

TestComplete	Cypress
It is an automated UI testing tool that makes it fast and easy to create, maintain, and execute functional tests across desktop, web, and mobile applications. With TestComplete, you can increase test coverage and ensure you ship high-quality, battle-tested software	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.
Building Automated UI Tests; Object Recognition Engine now with Artificial Intelligence; HTML5 Test Automation; Data-Driven Testing; Automated Test Reporting & Analysis	Time Travel; Debuggability; Automatic Waiting; Spies, Stubs, and Clocks; Network Traffic Control; Consistent Results; Screenshots and Videos
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 49.4K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 3.4K
Stacks 39	Stacks 3.5K
Followers 60	Followers 2.0K
Votes 0	Votes 115
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 29 Open source 22 Great documentation 20 Simple usage 18 Fast 10 Cross Browser testing Cons 21 Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing 14 Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support 12 No iFrame support 9 No multiple domain support 9 No page object support
Integrations
Jenkins Git Visual Studio Jira Bugzilla	No integrations available

What are some alternatives to TestComplete, Cypress?

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.

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.

Robot Framework

It is a generic test automation framework for acceptance testing and acceptance test-driven development. It has easy-to-use tabular test data syntax and it utilizes the keyword-driven testing approach. Its testing capabilities can be extended by test libraries implemented either with Python or Java, and users can create new higher-level keywords from existing ones using the same syntax that is used for creating test cases.

Karate DSL

Combines API test-automation, mocks and performance-testing into a single, unified framework. The BDD syntax popularized by Cucumber is language-neutral, and easy for even non-programmers. Besides powerful JSON & XML assertions, you can run tests in parallel for speed - which is critical for HTTP API testing.

Related Comparisons

Cypress vs TestComplete: What are the differences?

1. Execution Speed: Cypress is known for its fast execution speed as it runs directly within the browser and is able to control everything happening in the browser. On the other hand, TestComplete relies on external drivers to communicate with the browser, which can sometimes result in slower execution speed.
2. Architecture: Cypress follows a unique architecture where it runs directly in the browser and provides native access to the DOM, allowing real-time reloading and debugging. TestComplete, on the other hand, operates at a higher level and uses a separate client-server architecture for test execution.
3. Web Application Testing: Cypress is specifically designed for testing web applications and provides comprehensive support for modern web technologies like React, Angular, and Vue.js. TestComplete, on the other hand, is a more general-purpose testing tool that supports a wider range of applications, including desktop, mobile, and web.
4. Programming Language: Cypress uses JavaScript as its scripting language, making it easier for developers to adopt and integrate with their existing workflows. TestComplete supports multiple programming languages like JavaScript, Python, VBScript, etc., providing flexibility but requiring additional setup and knowledge of those languages.
5. Test Debugging: Cypress offers an intuitive and powerful built-in time-travel debugging feature, which allows developers to pause, step through, and inspect the state of their tests in real-time. TestComplete provides debugging capabilities as well but may require additional setup and configuration.
6. Community Support: Cypress has gained significant popularity in recent years, which has led to a growing and active community of developers who contribute to the ecosystem with plugins, documentation, and community support. TestComplete also has a community base, but it may not be as extensive and active as Cypress.

Cypress vs TestComplete

Overview