In the dynamic world of test automation, choosing the right platform can be pivotal. Leapwork and Mabl are leading solutions that streamline testing processes.
Leapwork is a no-code, AI-driven platform that excels in web, Android, and iOS automation, and is praised for its ease of use and support for non-technical testers. On the other hand, Mabl offers a low-code, AI-powered testing environment primarily for web applications, focusing on reducing maintenance efforts and integrating seamlessly with CI/CD workflows. Both platforms offer robust reporting but differ in their approach to ease of use and platform support.
Latest update: 1/9/2024, 5:35:10 PM
We do not guarantee the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of the information presented on our website. This includes prices, product specifications, and availability, which are subject to change. The reviews on this site are collected from g2.com and crozdesk.com and summarized by us.
Feature comparison of Leapwork and Mabl
|Uses Computer Vision
|Ease Of Use
|very easy to learn
|very easy to learn
|Is Open Source
– Comprehensive data storage abilities without being locked into a single solution.
– Excellent support with timely solutions upon request.
– Ease of use in creating subflows for reusable tasks, which benefits non-technical testers.
– Enables manual testers to create automation without extensive coding knowledge.
– GUI-based platform that is easy to learn with a supportive knowledge base.
– No technical prerequisites required for use.
– In-depth strategy editor that supports web, desktop, and API automation.
– Seamless integration of test cases involving both desktop and web applications.
– Video export feature of executed test cases for documentation and training.
– Excellent debugging functionality, including live video execution and video recording.
– Easy to implement and deploy across teams.
– Comprehensive documentation with practical examples and strong support from the mabl team.
– Supports multi-browser and API testing, including Postman collection imports for end-to-end user flow automation.
– No infrastructure maintenance required with a low-code approach suitable for non-technical teams.
– Demonstrates good return on investment when compared to the cost of hiring full-time testing personnel.
– Facilitates rapid test case development with built-in auto-healing capabilities, essential for Agile environments.
– Features an intuitive visual trainer for quick creation and updating of test cases.
– Supports multi-tab testing in browsers and captures visual comparisons and performance metrics.
– Enables efficient test creation through features like data tables for testing multiple scenarios.
– Offers SaaS automation, detailed test results, and a new learning platform (mabl University) for user training.
– Minor user interface issues, such as watermarks not disappearing when typing.
– Lack of check-in control in the Platform version compared to the Enterprise version.
– Reporting features could be enhanced, such as email reports and dashboard improvements.
– Identifying some web elements can be counterintuitive and may require advanced knowledge.
– Mobile automation not built-in; reliance on third-party providers or tools is necessary.
– Test execution can be slow when using remote agents.
– Limited functionality for executing sub-flows compared to main flows.
– Data-driven test automation from Excel is not dynamic and could be improved.
– Limited Excel integration with only basic Read and Write blocks available.
– Still an on-premises tool; could benefit from being cloud-based with automated backups and disaster recovery.
– Does not support native mobile test automation.
– Lacks integration with some popular test management tools like Testrail.
– Limited reporting options and areas for improvement in security features.
– Occasional discrepancies between cloud and local executions, leading to unexpected failures.
– The mabl documentation could benefit from more detailed, specific examples.
– The use of labels for test organization can be confusing and has a learning curve.
– Challenges with the Trainer incorrectly recording steps, requiring re-recording to fix issues.
– Inconsistencies with tests that only run successfully within a test plan and not independently.
– Lack of a more extensive community for user support compared to open-source alternatives.
– Auto-healing feature can be overly aggressive and may incorrectly modify tests without user intent.
Pricing Overview of Leapwork and Mabl
Leapwork Pricing Summary
Leapwork Test Automation offers a customized pricing model that is tailored to fit businesses of various sizes and requirements. The pricing is not listed publicly and instead requires potential users to contact Leapwork directly. This allows organizations to receive a bespoke pricing plan that is specifically designed to meet their particular business needs, team size, and automation goals.
Mabl Pricing Summary
Mabl also adopts a personalized pricing model, focusing on the specific needs of a software team. Similar to Leapwork, mabl does not provide upfront pricing details; instead, it requires a pricing request submission. Mabl’s team then delivers a custom quote based on the desired test coverage and scalability needs. Additionally, mabl offers an average increase in test coverage, faster test creation, and a reduction in bugs, along with a custom ROI analysis and a calculator for estimating testing requirements.
Comparison of Pricing Models
Both Leapwork and Mabl use personalized pricing models, which means that the cost is determined based on the individual needs of each customer, rather than a fixed pricing structure. This approach is beneficial for businesses looking for a solution that can be tailored to their specific requirements. Now, let’s delve into the key similarities and differences between the two pricing models:
- Customization: Both Leapwork and Mabl emphasize the importance of providing a pricing plan that is customized for each client’s unique needs.
- Direct Contact for Quotes: Customers must reach out directly to both Leapwork and Mabl to initiate a discussion regarding their pricing needs.
- Focus on Business Objectives: Each service aims to align their pricing with the business objectives and team dynamics of the customer.
- Value Proposition: Mabl highlights its value proposition by quantifying the potential benefits such as a 90% increase in test coverage, tripling the speed of test creation, and reducing bugs by 40%. Leapwork focuses on the customization aspect without providing specific metrics.
- ROI Analysis: Mabl offers a custom ROI analysis and a comparative review against other market solutions during the pricing discussion, which helps clients understand the return on investment they can expect.
- Estimation Tools: Mabl provides a calculator for customers to estimate their testing needs, which can be a valuable tool for understanding the potential costs involved.
In conclusion, while Leapwork and Mabl share a similar approach to personalized pricing, mabl extends additional resources such as ROI analysis and estimation tools during the quote process. These tools are designed to help customers make an informed decision by understanding the potential return on investment and the comparative advantages over other solutions in the market. On the other hand, Leapwork’s emphasis remains on tailoring a solution that fits the customer’s business model and team structure, without providing upfront quantifiable benefits or comparison tools.