ACCELQ vs. Protractor

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
Protractor
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Protractor is an end to end test framework for Angular apps.N/A
Pricing
ACCELQProtractor
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ACCELQProtractor
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
ACCELQProtractor
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons

No answers on this topic

Best Alternatives
ACCELQProtractor
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.6 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.6 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ACCELQProtractor
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ACCELQProtractor
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
Open Source
It is a strong fit for end-to-end acceptance and regression testing inside the browser.
Read full review
Pros
ACCELQ
  • Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
  • Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
  • Learning curve is small.
Read full review
Open Source
  • Async operations for browser-based validation tests. This kind of feature is a must-have for building tests to scale.
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
Open Source
  • It would be great to see the Protractor API implemented successfully inside a non-Angular web application.
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
Open Source
Cypress.io is an alternative end-to-end test framework that does NOT use Selenium. Since I've only evaluated this tool as a possible solution, my estimation of its performance against Protractor is incomplete. However, if you and your team are looking for automation solutions outside of the Selenium scope, then Cypress.io may be a good fit given the problems you're trying to solve.
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
Open Source
  • Increased the number of reliable end to end tests inside my test suites.
  • Decreased the number and frequency of false-positive test runs/results.
Read full review
ScreenShots