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 PhantomJS

Karma vs PhantomJS

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Karma
Karma
Stacks4.8K
Followers603
Votes181
GitHub Stars12.0K
Forks1.7K
PhantomJS
PhantomJS
Stacks1.7K
Followers430
Votes18
GitHub Stars29.5K
Forks5.7K

Karma vs PhantomJS: What are the differences?

Developers describe Karma as "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. On the other hand, PhantomJS is detailed as "Scriptable Headless WebKit". PhantomJS (www.phantomjs.org) is a headless WebKit scriptable with JavaScript. It is used by hundreds of developers and dozens of organizations for web-related development workflow.

Karma and PhantomJS are primarily classified as "Browser Testing" and "Headless Browsers" tools respectively.

Some of the features offered by Karma are:

  • Test on Real Devices
  • Remote Control
  • Testing Framework Agnostic

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

  • Multiplatform, available on major operating systems: Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and other Unices.
  • Fast and native implementation of web standards: DOM, CSS, JavaScript, Canvas, and SVG. No emulation!
  • Pure headless (no X11) on Linux, ideal for continuous integration systems. Also runs on Amazon EC2, Heroku, and Iron.io.

"Test Runner" is the top reason why over 56 developers like Karma, while over 12 developers mention "Scriptable web browser" as the leading cause for choosing PhantomJS.

Karma and PhantomJS are both open source tools. It seems that PhantomJS with 26.9K GitHub stars and 5.7K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Karma with 10.7K GitHub stars and 1.61K GitHub forks.

According to the StackShare community, Karma has a broader approval, being mentioned in 119 company stacks & 57 developers stacks; compared to PhantomJS, which is listed in 77 company stacks and 47 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)
or
Manual

Advice on Karma, PhantomJS

Ankur
Ankur

Software Engineer

Dec 4, 2019

Needs advice

I am using Node 12 for server scripting and have a function to generate PDF and send it to a browser. Currently, we are using PhantomJS to generate a PDF. Some web post shows that we can achieve PDF generation using Puppeteer. I was a bit confused. Should we move to puppeteerJS? Which one is better with NodeJS for generating PDF?

73.1k views73.1k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Karma
Karma
PhantomJS
PhantomJS

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.

PhantomJS is a headless WebKit scriptable with JavaScript. It is used by hundreds of developers and dozens of organizations for web-related development workflow.

Test on Real Devices;Remote Control;Testing Framework Agnostic;Open Source;Easy Debugging;Continuous Integration
Multiplatform, available on major operating systems: Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and other Unices; Fast and native implementation of web standards: DOM, CSS, JavaScript, Canvas, and SVG. No emulation; Pure headless (no X11) on Linux, ideal for continuous integration systems. Also runs on Amazon EC2, Heroku, and Iron.io; Easy to install: Download, unpack, and start having fun in just 5 minutes
Statistics
GitHub Stars
12.0K
GitHub Stars
29.5K
GitHub Forks
1.7K
GitHub Forks
5.7K
Stacks
4.8K
Stacks
1.7K
Followers
603
Followers
430
Votes
181
Votes
18
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
  • 13
    Scriptable web browser
  • 3
    Depends on QT
  • 2
    No ECMAScript 6
Integrations
Jasmine
Jasmine
Mocha
Mocha
FreeBSD
FreeBSD
macOS
macOS
Windows
Windows
Linux
Linux

What are some alternatives to Karma, PhantomJS?

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.

WebdriverIO

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

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

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.

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