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.
*These best automation testing tools are top-rated in their category, according to G2 Grid Reports. I've also added their monthly or annual pricing to make comparisons easier for you.
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.
I spent weeks trying and analyzing various automation testing tools to the best of my ability across various operating systems. I also used AI to narrow down features, pros and cons, and real-time reviews to give a correct picture of each automation testing tool. Further, I also referred to the proprietary G2 score for each of these tools and other additional parameters like customer sentiments, ease of use, ease of budget, ease of admin, and market presence to establish the authority of all these individual tools and mentioned real-user reviews for your informed decision-making.
While I evaluated 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.
I have a good idea of which potential services will benefit your IT and dev teams.
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:
*This data was pulled from G2 in 2025. Some reviews may have been edited for clarity.
As I reviewed G2 feedback on Keysight Eggplant, I noticed that image-based automation is frequently highlighted as a standout capability. Users seem to appreciate how the tool visually interacts with the front-end interface, allowing them to validate UI elements without relying solely on code. This approach seems especially useful for teams working on cross-device testing for both web and mobile applications.
Many reviewers mention the platform’s optical character recognition (OCR) as a helpful feature for parsing project files and verifying text within graphical interfaces. G2 users often call out how this enables them to automate tests on dynamic content and GUIs more effectively.
I gathered that multi-platform compatibility is another strong point for users. Several reviews praise the tool’s flexibility in supporting testing across mobile apps, browsers, desktop software, and enterprise systems. The ability to launch and test in varied environments is seen as a key advantage for teams with diverse application stacks.
There’s a noticeable appreciation for the tool’s support for multiple scripting languages like C++, Python, and JavaScript. This seems to give development teams the freedom to tailor their automation processes based on the languages and platforms they’re already using.
That said, pricing tends to be a common concern. Multiple reviewers mention struggles with affordability, especially for smaller teams. Negative feedback focuses on the more cost-effective tool for large enterprise settings with complex testing needs.
While the platform is generally considered intuitive, advanced features may present a learning curve. G2 users often refer to documentation to better understand more technical elements, indicating room for improvement in onboarding or user guidance.
On a positive note, I noticed several mentions of responsive customer support. Users say the support team is quick to assist and helpful in resolving issues, which appears to significantly improve their overall testing experience.
"Eggplant is a great tool for UI automation. It's so easy to learn and use. The customer support team is definitely on another level, so proactive and supportive. We use it for UI automation on multiple devices, hence making it an extensive and game-changing automation platform.
This has reduced testing time and cut down some extra operations cost."
- Keysight Eggplant Review, Brondon F.
"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.
Structure, design, and write tests in different app programming languages for your network database architecture and improve production efficiency.
As I explored G2 feedback for the UiPath Platform, I noticed that users frequently highlight its graphical user interface testing capabilities. Many appreciate how it double-checks both visual and text elements while also verifying backend accuracy. This layered testing seems to enhance trust in the overall quality of automation workflows.
Visual workflow design is another feature that stands out across reviews. Users seem to appreciate the intuitive drag-and-drop interface, especially those without a heavy coding background. I gathered that this functionality lowers the barrier to entry for building automation scripts and allows teams to prototype and iterate rapidly.
UiPath’s AI and NLP capabilities are consistently praised. Several G2 reviewers mention how these features help automate contextual testing by understanding user behavior and business logic. This appears to be particularly helpful in managing complex QA workflows and ensuring data accuracy.
I also noted that bot scheduling and performance analytics are well-received. Users say these tools streamline repeated test execution and reduce errors. Multiple reviewers mention being able to run iterative test loops reliably across platforms, which they credit for reducing manual oversight and accelerating deployment.
Many users point out that UiPath’s learning ecosystem, particularly the UiPath Academy, is a major strength. The range of tutorials and certifications seems to support both beginners and seasoned users, with several reviewers calling it a valuable resource for onboarding and skill development.
That said, I noticed that monitoring is a recurring concern. Multiple G2 users mention needing to manually oversee automation campaigns to avoid unexpected test results. I gathered that while the automation is powerful, it may not be entirely hands-off, especially for more complex workflows.
I also noticed some dissatisfaction regarding licensing and workflow complexity. Users often point out that the cost may not suit smaller organizations. Feedback suggested that more complex use cases can require custom coding, which can be challenging for teams hoping to rely only on the drag-and-drop features.
Lastly, I observed mixed feedback on UiPath’s documentation and support. While extensive resources are available, several reviewers experienced delays when trying to resolve specific or escalated issues. I got the impression that faster, more responsive support could improve the overall experience for many users.
"The Best thing I like about Uipath is its comprehensive approach to automation, making it a powerful tool for technical and non-technical users. It also has advanced capabilities, allowing users to automate everything from simple to complex tasks. Its drag-and-drop interface in Uipath studio makes it accessible to users without programming backgrounds."
- The UIPath Platform Review, Siddharth s K.
"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.
Explore a hassle-free way to develop a system or browser application with free low-code development platforms and pour life into your brand by being an online market mover.
As I reviewed G2 feedback on BrowserStack, I noticed users frequently highlight its end-to-end test lifecycle framework. Many seem to appreciate the ability to control the impact of test feedback and track persistent errors throughout the testing process. I gathered that this structured approach helps streamline how QA teams handle complex testing stages.
I encountered repeated praise for BrowserStack’s real-device and environment testing. Users often point out that the platform goes beyond emulators and simulators by allowing actual runtime testing of applications across environments. From what I’ve gathered, this gives developers greater confidence in how apps will perform once deployed to production.
One of the most commonly celebrated features is BrowserStack’s device-browser coverage. I observed that users love access to over 3,000 combinations, which makes it easy to test on everything from legacy browsers to the latest mobile OS versions. This breadth of coverage appears to be a major differentiator in the cloud testing space.
I also picked up on strong feedback around BrowserStack’s ease of use and integrations. Users seem to value how quickly they can log in, select a test environment, and build scenarios. I noticed that integrations with tools like Selenium, Appium, Cypress, and CI/CD pipelines are frequently mentioned as key to aligning test workflows with modern development practices.
Regarding automation speed and reliability, I found that users are generally impressed. Multiple reviewers mention being able to automate various test cases with minimal intervention. I gathered that this feature adds significant value for teams aiming to scale their QA efforts without constant manual oversight.
That said, I noticed some challenges around technical complexity. Many G2 users—especially those without a deep coding background—mention that writing test scripts and understanding outputs can feel overwhelming. I observed that this can limit adoption for teams looking for more accessible, low-code solutions.
I also looked into feedback on integration setup, particularly with GitHub. While most users praise the wide range of supported tools, a few reviewers, like myself, found that integrating libraries and packages sometimes required deeper technical knowledge than expected.
I’ve seen mixed feedback regarding user experience. While the functionality is appreciated, several reviewers mention that the user interface could be more intuitive. I gathered that this may slow down onboarding for less experienced users or smaller QA teams.
I also noticed dissatisfaction around pricing and user access. BrowserStack’s subscription model appears to be a sticking point for smaller teams. Multiple reviewers mention that multi-user access isn’t available unless they upgrade to a higher-tier plan, making collaboration more expensive than expected.
Finally, when I looked at platform performance, most users reported reliable results. However, I saw a few comments about slower load times during peak hours. Still, I gathered that the overall ability to streamline cross-platform testing keeps it top of mind for many engineering teams.
"Honestly, BrowserStack is like having a full-blown device lab in your pocket without the clutter. The fact that I can test on dozens of devices - old iPhones, shiny new Androids, whatever the latest Chrome or Safari version is - without leaving my desk is a game-changer. I also love that it’s all in the cloud, so no clunky software installs. For someone juggling too many projects, it’s a huge time saver. Plus, their live testing is super slick - just hop in, pick a device/browser combo, and boom, you’re testing like a pro. It’s also helped me look smarter in meetings, which, let’s face it, we all need sometimes."
- BrowserStack Review, Dallas C.
"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.
If you are struggling to establish a robust testing and QA process, prepare to hire the right software developer to control and deploy accurate custom test expertise.
As I explored G2 reviews for Test IO, I noticed that users frequently highlight its centralized test data management. Many seem to appreciate that both coders and non-coders can collaborate using the same automation and validation workflows. I gathered that this makes it easier for teams to streamline testing without needing extensive training or technical expertise upfront.
I saw repeated praise for Test IO’s user-friendly interface. G2 users often call out how intuitive the platform feels, especially for busy teams juggling multiple testing projects. From what I gathered, the low learning curve helps users get started with test creation and management quickly and efficiently.
One feature that stood out in my analysis was Test IO’s crowd-testing capability. Reviewers frequently mention the benefit of connecting with a global network of testers to gather real-time feedback across various devices, markets, and platforms. I found this especially valuable for teams testing responsiveness and usability in real-world conditions.
G2 users also seem to value the iterative test recording and feedback functionality. Multiple reviewers mention how it gives them better control over test outcomes across cloud servers, operating systems, and device types. I gathered that this adds depth to automation efforts without overwhelming testers with technical complexity.
I found strong mentions of Test IO’s integration with tools like Jira and GitHub. Users often mention how these integrations help them manage bugs and tickets more efficiently without switching between multiple platforms. This seems to be a key benefit for teams focused on workflow continuity.
That said, I also noticed some limitations regarding customization and flexibility. G2 users point out that while Test IO works well for straightforward test cases, it can feel restrictive when crafting more niche or complex test scenarios. I saw this trend across multiple reviews from more technically advanced teams.
Regarding platform performance, there’s occasional dissatisfaction around sluggishness during test setup or when navigating the dashboard. I’ve gathered that while the platform usually runs smoothly, some users feel that the depth of features can make certain advanced options harder to discover or access quickly.
I also came across concerns about subscription management and pricing clarity. Several G2 reviewers mention that upgrading plans isn’t always intuitive and that the process could be more transparent. Still, most agree that Test IO remains flexible enough to support various team sizes and project needs.
"The entire process of using Test IO was incredibly user-friendly, and as a product owner, I felt supported by the Test.io team every step of the way. As a small team, we have limited resources, but Test.io made it easy to set up tests and push the results along to our developers while also saving one of the most valuable resources: my time."
- TestIO Review, Kate W.
"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.
As I reviewed G2 feedback, I noticed that users consistently praise cross-browser compatibility testing LambdaTest. Many reviewers say it’s easy to test websites across Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and even legacy browsers like Internet Explorer. I gathered that this flexibility is particularly helpful for developers working on applications meant for a wide range of devices and platforms.
I observed that even users new to testing find LambdaTest approachable, especially due to its live-testing dashboard. Reviewers mention being able to switch between browsers and devices effortlessly, simplifying the overall testing process. From what I read, this visual control panel is seen as a major convenience for beginners and non-technical team members.
In terms of integrations, I found that LambdaTest’s support for Selenium, Cypress, and Playwright receives a lot of positive attention. Users seem to appreciate how the platform handles complex test cases like visual simulation and acceptance testing. This is particularly beneficial for teams aiming to streamline their UI testing workflows without constantly switching tools.
Regarding performance, I gathered that many reviewers rely on LambdaTest for regression testing and test automation. Users mention it saves time by automating repetitive tasks and monitoring application behavior across updates. This appears to be a significant efficiency booster for production teams.
I also encountered several mentions of LambdaTest being ideal for non-coders entering the testing space. Reviewers highlight how intuitive and easy to deploy the platform is. Based on what I’ve read, users value its simplicity and accessibility, especially in environments where not everyone is technically trained
That said, I noticed recurring concerns about performance during peak hours. Multiple reviewers report occasional lags and delays in automation, which can affect productivity. There’s noticeable dissatisfaction around the platform's responsiveness when demand is high.
I also gathered that some users feel the automation features could be more advanced. A few G2 reviewers mention that incorporating AI-driven capabilities—like visual regression or image recognition—would significantly enhance the experience. This seems to be a common expectation as users grow into more complex use cases.
Despite those points, I found that LambdaTest is still widely viewed as a user-friendly test solution. For teams looking for a tool that balances ease of use with broad testing capabilities, G2 users generally consider it a reliable option.
"I appreciate LambdaTest’s feature set for desktop testing, including Responsive Testing, Network Throttling, Screenshot Testing, and IP Geolocation, which make cross-browser testing straightforward and efficient. The Ease of Use and Developer Tools are great for quickly debugging issues, and the Ease of Integration with tools like Selenium adds to its versatility. The responsive Customer Support is also a huge plus, addressing questions and issues promptly."
- Lambda Test Review, Apoorva M.
"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.
Find the right web browser environment to execute and launch new web applications, eliminate screen or backend inconsistencies, and provide an uninterrupted user experience.
From what I gathered through G2 reviews, users often highlight Katalon Platform's centralized testing dashboard as a major convenience. It allows them to manage test campaigns across various systems and web applications from a single interface. Many reviewers note that its AI-augmented quality management helps improve the end-user experience with minimal manual intervention.
I noticed that G2 users appreciate Katalon’s drag-and-drop test automation features. Tools like built-in spy and record functionalities are frequently mentioned to make it easier to observe functions, threads, and object declarations during test execution. This seems to be particularly helpful for those without advanced coding backgrounds.
Based on user feedback, UI element capturing is another standout. Many reviewers mention how easy it is to test dynamic content and responsive UIs across web and mobile apps. I found that users frequently rely on this feature when automating visual components that change with user interactions or screen sizes.
I also saw several positive mentions of data-driven testing. G2 users value connecting to Excel sheets or databases to run multiple iterations of the same test scenarios without rewriting code. This appears to be a time-saver, especially for QA teams handling large datasets.
The platform’s keyword-driven testing framework also received praise. I gathered that users find the pre-built keywords useful for automating common actions like clicking, verifying text, or managing pop-ups. For many, this simplifies the learning curve while still offering advanced functionality.
Reviewers also mention Katalon’s support for cross-platform test automation. I saw several users highlighting its ability to run tests across web, mobile, API, and desktop environments, which makes it suitable for end-to-end test coverage in diverse software ecosystems.
However, there’s noticeable frustration around integration with open-source tools. Multiple G2 users mention that setting up these integrations can be time-consuming and sometimes disrupt testing workflows. I found that this was a recurring theme among those trying to extend the platform’s functionality.
Another issue I encountered was configuring the Katalon Runtime Engine (KRE) via the command-line interface. Several users flagged this as a pain point, especially in CI/CD pipelines, due to the added complexity and potential cost implications.
Lastly, I noted that some users mentioned performance issues. Scrolling through large test cases or opening sizable projects sometimes felt sluggish. Reviewers suggest that more detailed test summaries and faster load times would enhance usability.
Despite these drawbacks, I gathered that G2 users view Katalon as a comprehensive automation solution. With a few improvements in speed and integration, many believe it has the potential to become an even more agile and enterprise-ready platform.
"One tool does it all! WebUI, API (SOAP/REST), Native, Mobile, parallel executions, multi-browser, Git interoperability, Eclipse integrated data environment (IDE), etc. Support is great, too. I love that it supports all levels of users, from quick recording/playback and keywords to experienced developers who need everything. I've used Katalon every day for the past three years and it's head and shoulders over its competition... and I've been developing test automation for 33 years, so I know what I'm saying here!"
- Katalon Review, Graham E.
"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.
Selenium remains the most popular automation testing tool for web applications, while Appium continues to be in demand for mobile testing in 2025.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
.png)
Software is eating the world.
by Dibyani Das
Accounting has never been my favorite subject.
by Sudipto Paul
ChatGPT paved the way for a new world where we can confidently say that AI is here to stay.
by Hy Nguyen
.png?width=400&height=150&name=Copy%20of%20G2%20Image%20(1).png)
