ACCELQ vs. Playwright

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ACCELQ
Score 8.0 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
Playwright
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
A cross-browser testing tool, playwright supports all modern rendering engines including Chromium, WebKit, and Firefox. Users can test on Windows, Linux, and macOS, locally or on CI, headless or headed. It is also cross-language, so that the Playwright API can be used in TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, .NET, Java. Test Mobile Web. Native mobile emulation of Google Chrome for Android and Mobile Safari. The same rendering engine works on the Desktop and in the Cloud. Playright…
$0
Pricing
ACCELQPlaywright
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQPlaywright
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
Best Alternatives
ACCELQPlaywright
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQPlaywright
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQPlaywright
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
Microsoft
Playwright is works pretty well for automating the critical user paths of any web application, ensuring that core functionalities are constantly tested and catching issues before they reach QA, particularly through its seamless integration into our CI/CD (in our case, using GithHub); however, it is less appropriate for mobile testing since it doesn't support mobile applications. Testers still needs to learn another framework to do this.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • automation
  • integrations
  • support
  • community
  • features
  • easy to use
  • documentation
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
Microsoft
  • bigger adoption
  • mobile testing
Read full review
Usability
ACCELQ
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
It makes automating complex user interactions easier, fits right into our CI/CD for continuous testing, and works great across different browsers. The Documentation is a plus, you don't really need to search a lot to understand and find what you need for the coding. The community is small but very helpful, which makes it a breeze to use and a must-have for keeping our software in top shape.
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
Microsoft
We selected Playwright over the rest for several reasons. The learning curve is faster, making it easier for our team to get up to speed quickly. The setup is pretty straithtforwared, minimal configurartion needed and a great example included in the configuration which includes all the basics to start writing using that spec as a placeholder. Compared to Cypress, Playwright support multiple browsers out of the box, giving us broader testing coverage. Appium is great for mobile testing, but extremely slow.
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
Microsoft
  • Reduce of cost of manual testers
  • Reduce of released bugs
  • Reduce of costs of developer time
  • Increase QA Coverage
Read full review
ScreenShots