5 February 2024 Leave a comment Tool comparisons
In the dynamic realm of test automation, Leapwork and Sauce Labs emerge as leading platforms, each with distinct advantages. Leapwork excels with its no-code, AI-driven test creation, offering a visual approach that empowers non-technical users to automate complex tests with ease.
Conversely, Sauce Labs provides a robust mobile testing suite, including a real device cloud and computer vision capabilities, to ensure comprehensive app quality. Both platforms support web, Android, and iOS testing, but differ in their core functionalities and user experience. Dive into our comparison to discern which solution best aligns with your testing needs.
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 Sauce Labs
| Feature | Leapwork | Sauce Labs |
|---|---|---|
| Free Plan | – | – |
| On Premise | ✔ | ✔ |
| Device Farm | – | ✔ |
| Scheduler | ✔ | N/A |
| No Code | ✔ | ✔ |
| Uses Ai | ✔ | ✔ |
| Generates Reports | ✔ | ✔ |
| Uses Computer Vision | ✔ | ✔ |
| Platforms | web,Android,iOS | web,Android,iOS |
| Ease Of Use | very easy to learn | easy to learn |
| Is Open Source | – | – |
| Support Included | ✔ | ✔ |
| Review Pros |
– 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 integrate with existing codebases, enhancing the adaptability for teams. – Offers a high degree of versatility for testing across different browsers, devices, and platforms. – Provides an intuitive user interface that is frequently updated based on user feedback. – Regularly introduces new features and improvements to the service. – Boasts a supportive community for troubleshooting and user assistance. – Enables effective cross-browser and cross-platform testing without complex setups. – Supports the latest web browsers and mobile operating systems for both forward and backward compatibility testing. – Facilitates parallel execution, allowing numerous instances to run simultaneously, which significantly reduces test suite execution time. – Features video recordings of tests to help identify where failures occur. – Includes a platform configurator to assist in running test suites on real mobile applications. |
| Review Cons |
– 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. |
– The cost can be high due to the reliance on virtual machines. – Users may occasionally encounter server errors. – Customer support response times can be slow. – Frequent changes in account managers can disrupt service continuity. – Lacks an option to export test reports in formats such as TestNG, Cucumber, and Extent directly from Sauce Labs. – The process of copying usernames and passwords from the profile can be cumbersome. – Errors during testing can occur, requiring users to rely on video features for debugging. – Does not provide email triage for report notifications of test suites. – Running real mobile device tests with the same web browser suite can present challenges. – The time taken for script execution can be a concern for some users. |
Pricing Model Comparison: Leapwork vs. Sauce Labs
Leapwork Test Automation Pricing Overview
Leapwork approaches pricing with a customizable strategy, aiming to serve businesses of varying sizes and with different requirements. Rather than presenting fixed pricing tiers, they offer a personalized quote system. Prospective customers are encouraged to engage in a dialogue with the Leapwork team to obtain a cost structure that is specifically tailored to their individual needs. This model supports a more consultative sales process, where the features and scale of the test automation solution can be matched closely to the customer’s operational demands and budget constraints.
Sauce Labs Continuous Testing Cloud Pricing Overview
Sauce Labs provides a more traditional tiered pricing model with several predefined plans for its Continuous Testing Cloud. Each plan is designed to address different levels of testing needs, from manual to automated testing, and offers access to a range of devices. Prices start at $39 per month for the basic “Live Testing” plan and scale up to $199 per month for the “Real Device Cloud” plan, with the option for monthly or annual billing. Sauce Labs also caters to enterprise customers with custom solutions and premium features. Notably, the plans include usage limitations, with overage charges applied for exceeding allotted testing minutes.
Comparison of the Pricing Models
Common Points:
- Both Leapwork and Sauce Labs offer solutions that cater to a spectrum of business sizes and testing requirements.
- Each provides a way for enterprise-level customers to obtain more personalized, premium services and features.
- The two companies are involved in test automation, though their product offerings and additional services differ.
Key Differences:
- Pricing Transparency: Sauce Labs provides clear, upfront pricing for its various plans, which can be immediately understood and compared by potential users. Leapwork, on the other hand, opts for a contact-based quote system, which does not readily disclose pricing without engagement with their sales team.
- Pricing Structure: Sauce Labs employs a tiered pricing structure with set plans and features, making it easy for customers to select a package that fits their needs and budget. Leapwork’s customized pricing model requires interaction with the company to determine the best fit, which can be beneficial for organizations with complex or unique needs but may be a barrier for those seeking quick solutions.
- Flexibility: Leapwork’s model indicates a higher level of flexibility in tailoring pricing and features to specific customer scenarios. Sauce Labs offers flexibility mainly through its enterprise solutions and the ability to switch between monthly and annual billing.
- Overage Charges: Sauce Labs specifies overage charges for exceeding testing minutes in plans with limits, which could be an important consideration for users with variable usage patterns. Leapwork does not disclose such details publicly, so the approach to overages, if any, is unknown until discussed directly.
- Support for Open Source: Sauce Labs specifically mentions support for open source projects with free accounts, which is an attractive point for developers and organizations involved in open source work. Leapwork does not mention such support in the provided description.
Conclusion:
When choosing between Leapwork and Sauce Labs, potential users should consider the transparency and specificity of Sauce Labs’ pricing against the bespoke nature of Leapwork’s cost structure. Organizations with straightforward testing needs may prefer the predictability of Sauce Labs’ tiered plans, while those with more specialized or fluctuating demands might benefit from Leapwork’s personalized approach.