ACCELQ vs. HeadSpin

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ACCELQ
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
ACCELQ is an agile quality management platform that helps users achieve continuous delivery for web, mobile, manual testing, and APIs. It can be used to write and manage manual test cases for the functionality that may be too fluid for automation.N/A
HeadSpin
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
HeadSpin is a Digital Experience AI Platform that combines a global device infrastructure, test automation, and ML-driven performance and quality of experience analytics. HeadSpin is designed to empower engineering, QA, operations, and product teams to assure optimal digital experiences across all delivery channels throughout the development lifecycle.N/A
Pricing
ACCELQHeadSpin
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQHeadSpin
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ACCELQHeadSpin
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Best Alternatives
ACCELQHeadSpin
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Sentry
Sentry
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.4 out of 10
Sentry
Sentry
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
New Relic
New Relic
Score 8.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQHeadSpin
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(1 ratings)
9.7
(17 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQHeadSpin
Likelihood to Recommend
ACCELQ
ACCELQ can support multiple technologies such as web, mobile, API, and mainframe. It’s also suited for SAAS solutions such as Salesforce and addresses challenges such as dynamic HTML. It’s easy to set up, and onboarding is easy, and overall lead time is comparatively less. The overall execution results are captured with screenshots, and it’s easy to debug errors. It has integrations with leading cloud-based desktop and mobile farm services such as Saucelabs, browser stack, etc.; ACCELQ is not developer friendly, and hence the overall adoption for a continuous integration scenario is very limited. If you are using a different test management solution, the integration between accelQ and that tool needs ti to be built and hence requires additional development effort, and it’s buggy too.
Read full review
HeadSpin
We have been using HeadSpin for our web and mobile application testing. It is an easy-to-use solution that provides detailed and in-depth analytics from the testing results. We also get a wide range of live networks and devices to perform the testing from HeadSpin. It has an inbuilt artificial intelligence engine that helps us to get real-time scenarios simulated, which is very helpful for finding performance issues and improving the overall quality of the applications.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
HeadSpin
  • Keep track of each browser we have tested and when we lastly updated them.
  • Remove any deprecated code or plugins that may cause issues with other browsers.
  • Add browser information to our site’s meta tags so that the site displays correctly in different browsers.
  • Test our website on all browsers to ensure compatibility.
Read full review
Cons
ACCELQ
  • The tool is not developer friendly and hence adoption across developers is low.
  • The tool does not have an admin console to manage the users centrally.
  • Different types of licensing and it’s all user based and hence pricey.
Read full review
HeadSpin
  • UI needs to be improved
  • Graphs on the dashboard are a bit laggy and need detailing for a better understanding of the user
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
ACCELQ
When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review
HeadSpin
Though LambdaTest was cheaper, it did not offer the deal devices and we wanted to be 100% sure that our app offers a perfect experience to all users. Simulators and emulators are not the technology we wanted to rely on.
Read full review
Return on Investment
ACCELQ
  • Overall adoption of an automation tool went up.
  • Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort.
  • Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult.
  • Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded.
Read full review
HeadSpin
  • Simplified the approach to test the mobile application on multiple devices from different vendors. This helped us to ensure the stability of the application in different environments.
  • In-depth analysis to understand the loopholes in the application design function. This helped us to improve the application design and overall user experience.
Read full review
ScreenShots