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. Playwright vs mabl

Playwright vs mabl

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

mabl
mabl
Stacks28
Followers55
Votes0
Playwright
Playwright
Stacks614
Followers586
Votes81
GitHub Stars79.0K
Forks4.8K

Playwright vs mabl: What are the differences?

  1. Integration: Playwright is a cross-browser automation library that supports multiple web browsers, including Chrome, Firefox, and WebKit. On the other hand, mabl is a testing and monitoring platform specifically designed for web applications. While both tools can be integrated into website development, Playwright focuses on browser automation, and mabl offers a broader range of testing and monitoring features.

  2. Test Creation: Playwright provides a programmatic API for writing tests in multiple programming languages, such as JavaScript, Python, and C#. It allows developers to write test scripts to interact with web pages and perform actions like clicking buttons, filling forms, and validating page content. In comparison, mabl offers a visual interface that enables users to create tests using a no-code approach. With mabl, testers can simply interact with the application and capture their actions without writing any code.

  3. Flexibility: Playwright allows developers to have more control and flexibility over test automation. It provides features like intercepting network requests, executing custom JavaScript on pages, and taking screenshots. This flexibility empowers developers to perform advanced test scenarios and interact with various aspects of the web application. On the other hand, mabl is designed to be user-friendly and focuses on simplifying the testing process. It provides a predefined set of actions and validations, making it easier for non-technical users to create tests without requiring extensive programming knowledge.

  4. Cross-Browser Compatibility: Playwright supports multiple web browsers, allowing developers to write tests that can be executed on different browsers without major modifications. It helps ensure that the web application works seamlessly across various browser environments. Conversely, mabl, being a testing and monitoring platform, works on the application level rather than the browser level. It concentrates on monitoring the application's behavior, performance, and compatibility across different environments rather than executing specific browser-level tests.

  5. Reporting and Analysis: Playwright provides basic reporting capabilities through test runners or frameworks that use it. However, the primary focus of Playwright is on test automation and providing developers with a tool to perform automated tests. In contrast, mabl offers advanced reporting and analysis features. It captures data during test runs, monitors application performance, and provides detailed insights and analytics to help identify and diagnose issues in the application.

  6. Collaboration and Team Management: mabl includes features designed for collaboration and team management. It allows team members to collaborate on test creation, execution, and analysis. It provides a central dashboard to manage test results, track changes, and assign tasks to various team members. Playwright, being a library, does not inherently include these collaboration and team management features, but it can be used in conjunction with other tools and frameworks that provide such functionalities.

In Summary, Playwright is a cross-browser automation library with a focus on providing control, flexibility, and programmatic test creation, while mabl is a testing and monitoring platform that offers a no-code test creation approach, advanced reporting, and collaboration features.

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

Detailed Comparison

mabl
mabl
Playwright
Playwright

Mabl is the leading intelligent test automation platform built for CI/CD. Integrate automated end-to-end testing into your development lifecycle.

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.

Fast easy setup; Machine driven regression testing; Auto-healing tests; Fully managed; Secure; Visual Inspection
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
28
Stacks
614
Followers
55
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
Jira
Jira
Bamboo
Bamboo
GitLab
GitLab
Codeship
Codeship
Postman
Postman
Travis CI
Travis CI
Jenkins
Jenkins
GitHub
GitHub
Slack
Slack
Segment
Segment
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to mabl, Playwright?

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.

Karma

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 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