I Reviewed 6 Best Automation Testing Tools in 2025 for Dev Teams

We presume writing and compiling software programs is easy. But it's not.

When I ran my first code, multiple red lines, syntactical errors, and inaccurate output were cramped in my console window.

My first experience in application development pushed me to learn the importance of automation testing. As a former developer, I know how important test automation is in assessing the impact of software code before it goes to a live project. 

Over the years, I've interacted with multiple software testers and learned the potential challenges, such as platform incompatibility, time constraints, lack of testing expertise, and bug reproduction, that can negatively impact end-user experience.  

These challenges led me to evaluate and analyze 40+ automation testing tools that debug, test, and assess the impact of software output before it goes into production. Out of these tools, I narrowed my list to the top 7 best automation testing tools that can reduce developers' stress and anxiety and lead to production efficiency. 

In addition to my own analysis, these tools are ranked top leaders in G2 based on their core features, such as end-to-end UI and UX automation, pre-scripting tools, and cross-platform testing. These features have helped them gain a good reputation among software developers and become top choices in the market.

6 best automation testing tools that I strongly recommend

Had I used automation testing back in my programming days, I wouldn't be neck deep into creating erroneous code and re-declaring software functions to repair the output. As it wasn't possible to keep a watch over every line of the programming logic, I now understand how automation testing is monumental in making these tedious tasks simpler.

Simply put, an automation testing program tests the functionality of all software codes with pre-scripting services before they are pushed to the live production stack. It is a key step in developing accurate applications as it creates various test scenarios and gives test feedback at the end of each test. With automation testing tools, I succeeded in running multiple iterative test loops to fasten the debugging process and improve code usability. 

Besides console programs, I could run test automation for various platforms and hardware devices and automate the CI/CD workflow to build a robust application. Other tests included API testing, load testing, browser testing and acceptance testing that evaluate if the code will work in an environment or not.

Once I set a test design and type, I sat back and started the automation. From nitpicking my runtime errors to giving a real-life test simulation, it eased the quality assurance process without much manual intervention.

My take on basic features for automation testing software

While I ran test automation for debugging, developers have a whole set of responsibilities. Not only are they required to debug written code, but they also control various applications for front-end and back-end synchronization. While some test automation services eased my worries, I experimented with more technical and developer-focused features that would improve business efficiency.

Having these basic functionalities for testing will be helpful if you are looking to invest in a test automation system for the long run. No software from this list would increase your workload or create a problematic scenario of wrong test output for your teams.

As I was on a hiatus from writing code, I became a little hesitant to put together this list initially, thinking I might not know enough. But, surprisingly, as I created tests myself, I got a good idea of which potential services will benefit your IT and dev teams.

• Support for parallel test execution: Tools that automated multiple test cases proved efficient in reducing developer's time-to-production.  For two programs I wrote and executed with different programming languages, it was easy to execute simultaneously and improve quality outcomes.
• Robust integration with CI/CD pipelines: I looked for seamless integration with Jenkins, Gitlab CI, or Azure DevOps. This allowed me to trigger tests automatically on every code commit, ensuring quality at every step of the development cycle. As developers continuously operationalize production by manually integrating prototypes with real production environments, automation testing software should automate the testing integration and CI/CD process to ensure a smooth flow of the software development lifecycle.
• Test variety and test feedback:  As organizations have various system consoles and web development processes, I searched for software that provides diverse test types and test varieties to debug and compile notebooks in different languages. During the automation process, it is also crucial for the tester (in this case, me) to evaluate whether the test followed all the right steps. Recording and replaying test steps, along with getting test feedback, is crucial to improving iterative outcomes and fine-tuning the code.
• Comprehensive reporting and analytics: Having customized reports that entail test tensions, test rounds, test design type, and bug production in actionable metrics was useful, as I could fix certain lines in the code after referring to that data. This helped me quickly identify test failures and trends to handle new exceptions and write better tests across different platforms. 
• Cross-platform and cross-browser compatibility: It was also imperative for me that the code go through browser testing, load testing, and API testing before getting published in the runtime environment. Having cross-platform and cross-browser compatibility ensures that your source code integrates with your web stack or system stack and that your UI code is compatible with the web browser environment to launch new features or updates without running tests again. 
• Advanced scripting and test maintenance capabilities: Building scripts for each individual program gets a little messy and ends with you re-declaring test functions or managing new test data. With advanced scripting, the tests I executed were recorded, and scripts were stored to be reused for other developers working with different software algorithms. I also preferred solutions with reusable test components, AI/ML support, and modular test creation, personalizing new tests as the application evolves.

The list below contains genuine user reviews from the automation testing tools category on G2. It's important to note that vendors offering a free trial are also considered free in this context. 

To be included in this category, a solution must:

• Execute software tests
• Run outcome reports
• Compare outcomes to previous tests
• Carry out tests multiple times in a day.

*This data was pulled from G2 in 2025. Some reviews may have been edited for clarity.  

1. Keysight Eggplant

I started my test automation journey with Keysight Eggplant, which provided pre-built scripting and AI-based test automation as part of its automation suite.

I found the tool extremely user-friendly and easy to navigate when running tests for my code. This was especially true when I wrote UI tests for my web and mobile applications to check compatibility across different devices. One thing that stood out was its image-based automation, which recognized the visuals in my code and tested whether they worked on the front-end interface.

Instead of relying solely on code, Keysight Eggplant let me automate visual elements to test graphical user interfaces and dynamic content. I could parse the project files with built-in optical character recognition (OCR) capability, which pulled text from image code and verified its authenticity.

Keysight Eggplant offered more versatility and agility as I could launch and test my code in multiple studios and environments. It's not just for web apps; I can use it for various platforms. Whether I am testing mobile apps, browsers, desktop software, or even complex enterprise systems, the tests run smoothly. 

It also provides a wide range of scripting languages, such as C++, Python, or JavaScript, that can be used to run tests on any platform or operating system.

Some G2 users feel that the pricing is higher, especially since testing tools are primarily designed for large-scale network architectures in enterprise settings. However, for teams with a diverse development workflow and rigorous testing procedures, it can be a worthwhile investment.

While the core features are user-friendly, some advanced functionalities may require additional learning. Like many G2 users, I found referring to the support documentation helpful in understanding certain technical aspects.

That being said, the customer service team was responsive, and their assistance led to a quick resolution of my queries, ultimately making my testing process even smoother and more efficient.

What I dislike about Keysight Eggplant 

• The user interface was a little difficult to work with. As a beginner, I had to take prior tutorials on the testing platform to understand it better. This is echoed in G2 reviews, where users mention a learning curve.
• I also faced slight issues while testing web applications across different browsers within a set turnaround time. It took time to load and integrate the tests with the source code. G2 reviews highlight similar concerns about integration. 

What G2 users dislike about Keysight Eggplant

"The GUI window isn't editable. DAI test captures, and stuff doesn't work. The executable license is only command-line driven; it would be very nice to have a GUI to pull up and schedule a test through, pass required parameters, etc. OR even allow the user to create a GUI window that is costume to the script being called to allow the user to configure and schedule a test for that script through it. FIX the handbook so that it is searchable again! it was great, and then they broke it, and now it's terrible."

- Keysight Eggplant, jessica h.

2. The UiPath Platform

The UiPath Platform offered core user interface and graphical testing to double verify each visual and text element and assess the accuracy of the backend code. 

It also offered drag-and-drop elements with the main notebook interface, which attached new scripts and functions with each source code as I designed multiple automation workflows. I am not a hardcore coder, so having a visual workflow designer that is intuitive and user-friendly made automation way less intimidating.

I was impressed by UiPath's natural language processing (NLP) capabilities and AI integrations. These features derived the context and helped set test conditions to satisfy every application's end-user demands, which eased the data quality assurance and production workflows.

I used UiPath's automated scripts to create a variety of tests across different platforms. Each iterative loop was executed without any lag or error. Plus, bot scheduling and bot performance analytics further reduced the scope of compilation errors and bug reproduction.

I also appreciated the learning resources. UI Path Academy contained a treasure trove of tutorials and certifications. Whether you are a beginner or an advanced user, there is something for everyone.

What I dislike about The UiPath Platform

• I faced some issues when choosing a selector, especially after switching to a new program, as I had to set up new selectors from scratch.
• Given the complexity of my code, selecting the right test type or test condition was time-consuming. According to G2 reviewers, this is a common challenge, often requiring external assistance from the DevOps team to ensure accurate test execution.

What G2 users dislike about UiPath Platform

"Building blocks have their downsides; in some complex scenarios, it is hard to use "Out of the box" solutions, or they become difficult to personalize, pushing devs to bring personalized code solutions, while an experienced developer could be able to easily find workarounds, jr devs, and citizen devs may struggle and feel limited."

- The UiPath Platform Review, Edwin B.

3. BrowserStack

BrowserStack offered a unique end-to-end test lifecycle framework and a variety of test cases to control the impact of test feedback and list persistent errors in the program.

I loved that BrowserStack offered various test types and QA coverage to launch tests for native desktop and mobile applications in various environments. I am not talking about test emulators or simulators that don't exhibit an application's workings. With BrowserStack, I could test and simulate software's runtime behavior and impact before pushing it into a production environment.

It is also incredible how they have covered over 3000 device-browser combinations. Whether I need to check my app on a legacy browser or mobile operating system, BrowserStack has me covered.

I also loved the platform's user intuitiveness. All I had to do was log in, pick a device-browser combination, and build my test scenarios. Plus, it integrates seamlessly with tools like Selenium, Appium, Cypress, and even CI/CD pipelines to auto-sync the product testing workflows with the live tech stack.

Speed is another huge plus. I could set and automate various test designs for various parts of the code in a pre-determined manner without touching the automation or attending it once it's active.

What I dislike about BrowserStack

• I found the plans to be a bit steep, especially if you’re not testing multiple codes daily. Many G2 reviewers share this sentiment, noting that the pricing may not be ideal for occasional testers.
• I also experienced occasional slowdowns and lag, and at times. According to G2 reviews, this isn’t uncommon, particularly during high-traffic periods.

What G2 users dislike about BrowserStack

"We can do almost everything with BrowserStack in UI testing. However, it does not have support for API testing, Automation, or Manual. It should include some features for testing of APIs as well."

- BrowserStack Review, Ankit Singh P.

4. Test IO

Test IO promises to deliver a one-stop automation and validation workflow, mostly because it offers centralized test data management and test designs for both coders and non-coders.

When I started using Test IO, the first thing that struck me was how intuitive and user-friendly the platform felt. It is designed to simplify testing workflows for busy teams, making it almost effortless to dive into test creation and management without going through a steep learning curve. 

What sets Test IO apart for me is its crowd-testing ability for responsiveness on cross-functional platforms. The platform connected my project to a vast network of testers so I could get real-time feedback from developers and testers in diverse environments and markets.

I loved the iterative test recording and feedback feature, which enabled me to control the application's outcome across multiple operating systems, devices, and cloud servers. 

Setting up tests was simple: I had to pre-set test conditions, identify selectors, and run unattended automation. They include customizable and robust integration tools, so I am not stuck building tests from scratch.

Plus, Test IO's integration with platforms like Jira and GitHub helps streamline workflows by allowing me to track bugs and manage tasks without jumping on multiple platforms.

Test IO streamlines testing workflows, making them seamless and efficient, particularly for straightforward test setups. However, like many G2 users, I’ve found it somewhat restrictive when crafting highly tailored or niche test scenarios.

While the platform generally runs smoothly, some G2 users have reported occasional sluggishness when setting up test scripts or navigating the dashboard. This makes sense to me, given its extensive feature set, some advanced options can be easily overlooked unless actively sought out.

Test IO offers a variety of subscription plans, but the upgrade process could be more intuitive. Many G2 users share this sentiment. That said, the platform remains flexible enough to accommodate teams of different sizes.

What I dislike about Test IO 

• With low-code automation, I found it a little difficult to set up diverse test designs for my code. Many G2 reviewers echo this, mentioning that while the platform simplifies automation, it can feel limiting for more complex test scenarios.
• It did support app and browser testing, which was useful, but I noticed, like many G2 users, that it lacked support for API testing and load testing, which could be a drawback for teams needing a more comprehensive testing solution.

What G2 users dislike about Test IO

"There is a low ability to customize the testing process to be super specific; it forces you to make your tests a specific way, which is useful for reusability and understanding, but not helpful when you have a complex or specific process it isn't capable of."

- Test IO Review, William G.

5. Lambda Test

LambdaTest provides specialized data structure and node management features for object-oriented languages like C++, Python, and Java to reduce compilation hassles for developers. 

Lambda Test has been a real game changer because it is so easy to implement tests for web browser compatibility. With Lambda Test, I could test cross-platform compatibility for Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or even older versions of Internet Explorer.

Even though I was new to testing, I could jump right in and execute my software code with ease and automate the entire process with pre-defined test scripts. Features like a live-testing dashboard made it simple to switch between different browsers and devices seamlessly.

LambdaTest is also integrated with Selenium, Cypress, and Playwrite to execute complex tests like acceptance testing and visual simulation for user interfaces across different platforms. It also saved me a lot of time by running regression tests and managing the application's behavior.

LambdaTest is a great solution for non-coders stepping into software testing. I found it convenient, easy to understand, and simple to deploy for production teams.

However, during peak hours, the system felt unresponsive and occasionally lagged during automation. While the automation features are solid, I wish they were more advanced. G2 users mentioned that adding AI-powered visual regression or image recognition could enhance the experience.

That said, for those looking for an accessible and user-friendly testing platform, LambdaTest remains a reliable choice.

What I dislike about the Lambda Test

• I encountered some issues during mobile testing, particularly with the lack of integrations for Apple Pay and GPS tracking. Many G2 reviewers have pointed out similar limitations, noting that these features would enhance the platform’s mobile testing capabilities.
• Additionally, it was hard for me to maintain consistency for specific tests due to the session durations. Running tests on the free version also felt slower at times, a concern echoed by other G2 users who found that execution speeds could lag without a paid plan.

What G2 users dislike about Lambda Test

"The initial configuration can be a bit challenging to understand. It took me some time to navigate the setup process, but once that hurdle was cleared, the rest of the experience was smooth."

- Lambda Test Review, Bruno C.

6. Katalon Platform

I found the Katalon Platform offered a centralized testing dashboard for running test campaigns for different systems and web applications. It also scrutinized code with AI-augmented quality management to optimize end-user experience with less effort.

Katalon Platform made product testing and software debugging easy to understand with drag-and-drop test automation. It also offered built-in spy and record functionalities, which enabled me to monitor every function, thread, and object declaration during testing.

While it's packed with tools you'd expect from a premium automation platform, specific technical features stood out to me. Capturing UI elements was effortless, even when I had to test dynamic web components and responsive graphical user interfaces for my web and mobile applications.

One feature that impressed me was Katalon's data-driven testing capability. By connecting with external data sources like Excel and databases, I could run tests on the same test scenarios without having to rewrite anything.

Katalon Platform also gave me complete test coverage with its keyword-driven framework. It came with pre-built keywords that made common tasks like clicking elements, verifying text, or managing pop-ups easy during automation campaigns.

In addition, I managed to automate test workflows across web, mobile, API, and desktop applications. 

Katalon brings everything together in one place: data-driven testing, test reports, and API support, making it a solid choice for automation.

That said, like several G2 users, I encountered some roadblocks when setting up automation. Integrating Katalon with certain open-source tools required extra effort, which slowed me down.

G2 reviewers have also mentioned challenges with configuring and deploying Katalon's Runtime Engine (KRE) via the command-line interface, especially when executing CI/CD pipelines, as it could impact overall budgets.

Additionally, I noticed some performance sluggishness throughout the testing process. Scrolling through test cases or loading larger projects felt a bit slow, and a more detailed test summary at the end would have been beneficial.

Still, Katalon provides a comprehensive automation solution, and with more refinement in execution, it could become even more agile and robust.

What I dislike about the Katalon Platform

• I found the main test interface a bit confusing, as I had to scroll through multiple options just to set up my test case. Many G2 reviewers share this sentiment, mentioning that the interface could be more intuitive for smoother navigation.
• Setting up and configuring Katalon for mobile testing was a little challenging, as the process felt more complex than expected. Many G2 users noted that the learning curve for mobile testing setup could be improved.

What G2 users dislike about the Katalon Platform

"The downside of Katalon is, you have to pay for a license if you need to do CI/CD integration, Visual testing, Unlimited Analytical results on TestOps (plugin to show execution result)."

- Katalon Platform Review, Monish p.

Automation testing tools: Frequently answered questions (FAQs)

Which automation testing tool is in demand in 2025?

Selenium remains the most popular automation testing tool for web applications, while Appium continues to be in demand for mobile testing in 2025.

Which automation testing tool is better, Selenium or Playwright?

There can’t be a testing tool that works better than the other. Selenium is better for cross-browser testing and extensive community support, while Playwright excels in faster execution, modern browsing support, and built-in features like auto-waiting to execute software tests seamlessly.

Which is the best free automation testing tool?

Currently, Keysight Eggplant and UiPath platforms are two leading tools in the automation testing tools category on G2 for powerful native GUI testing across mobile and web applications.   

Which is the best automation testing tool that you can use with no coding?

You can integrate automation testing tools into your CI/CD pipeline by configuring the test execution in pipeline stages (Jenkins, GitHub stages) using CLI commands or scripts. Ensure that software libraries are integrated with the testing campaigns and that test results are captured via the plugins you set.

How do I handle dynamic elements in automation testing software?

Dynamic elements are handled using strategies like XPath, which contains and starts with functions, HTML and CSS selectors with partial matching, and waiting mechanisms like explicit waits. Tools like Selenium also support custom selectors that extract and test visual elements.

Which is the best automation testing software for web applications?

The best automation testing software for web applications includes Cypress for modern front-end apps, TestComplete for ease of use, Katalon Studio for comprehensive features, and Pupeteer for unattended Chrome Testing.

Don't wait, just automate

Whether it is a web or mobile development process, I figured that DevOps teams and software testers need to factor in network infrastructure demands, internet connectivity, and the nature of the datasets integrated with their live code to get a clearer picture of which automation testing platform suits them. 

As I went through and implemented these software tests on my code, I realized that the real IT and DevOps workflows are much more complex and diverse. While software developers are concerned with optimizing the software testing workflows, taking a step back and evaluating all parameters would help you make an informed decision. 

Feeling overwhelmed when choosing the correct software procedure for your brand? I'd urge you to refer to this honest analysis of the 10 best text editors in 2025 to become a pro at software programming.