Repeato vs Waldo

Repeato vs Waldo

1 February 2024 Stephan Petzl Leave a comment Tool comparisons

In the dynamic realm of mobile application testing, Repeato and Waldo emerge as prominent no-code platforms designed to streamline the testing process. Repeato boasts AI-driven testing with computer vision for both iOS and Android, offering on-premise deployment and test scheduling.


In contrast, Waldo—part of the Tricentis suite—emphasizes collaborative tools and an intuitive interface that caters to teams seeking to enhance app quality without the complexities of coding. Both platforms facilitate test automation and report generation, yet they diverge in their approach to AI utilization and infrastructure flexibility. Our article delves into the nuances distinguishing these innovative testing solutions.


Latest update: 1/12/2024, 1:25:33 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 Repeato and Waldo

FeatureRepeatoWaldo
Free Plan Available
On Premise AvailableN/A
Device Farm AvailableN/AN/A
Scheduler AvailableN/A
No Code
Uses AiN/A
Generates Reports
Uses Computer Vision
PlatformsAndroid,iOSAndroid,iOS
Ease Of Usevery easy to learnvery easy to learn
Review Pros 1. Simple and intuitive interface
2. Easy setup process, no complex configurations needed
3. Accessibility for both developers and non-programmers
4. Supports various testing methods like clicks, drags and scripting
5. Exceptional stability, no crashes or driver issues
6. Regular updates with bug fixes and excellent customer support
7. Great for mobile app testing, with efficient script creation
8. Allows for hundreds of additional tests each day
9. User-friendly, with easy adaptation and no initial setup required
10. Recognizes elements using visual fingerprints for testing
11. Allows for reusability and easy maintenance of scripts
12. No prior training or complex coding skills needed
1. Tests from a real user’s perspective, making it less sensitive to UI changes.
2. Finds elements even if they change position, ID, or size, leading to more successful test completions.
3. Assertion feature alerts when changes are detected that may need review.
4. Includes a flakiness score to identify and improve flaky tests.
5. Advanced features like deep linking and branch testing enhance testing capabilities.
6. Contributes to faster and more efficient development cycles by catching bugs earlier.
7. Allows for confidence in releasing new updates without full manual regression.
8. Scalable and reliable technology that mimics real user interactions.
9. Excellent customer support with proactive outreach and dedicated communication channels.
10. Reduces manual testing time significantly, allowing for faster feedback loops and quicker bug fixes.
Review Cons 1. Some limitations for iOS applications when tapping on any system window outside of the app
2. Access to CI/CD tools is only available at the enterprise level
3. Occasional unknown errors while performing basic tasks, although they are quickly remedied in the next version.
1. Continuous evolution of the product can require frequent adaptation of testing methods.
2. Some users experience slower execution speed of test suites.
3. Edge cases may be challenging to automate with the current toolset.
4. No-code approach may lead to updating tests only after new code breaks them.
5. Learning curve associated with adopting new developer tools like Waldo.
6. Can’t automate 100% of tests, as certain scenarios may still require manual attention.
7. End-to-end tests, particularly on mobile, can be inherently slow.
8. Dependency on the tool’s updates and improvements for better performance.
9. Some initial setup and familiarization with the technology are necessary.
10. May not be as intuitive for teams accustomed to traditional code-first testing approaches.


Pricing Models of Repeato and Waldo

Repeato Pricing Overview

Repeato adopts a tiered pricing strategy aimed at accommodating a broad spectrum of users, from individual developers to large enterprises. The service is anchored by a Free plan that supports unlimited testing for Android and iOS applications, which is particularly useful for small-scale projects or individual use. For those seeking expanded functionality, Repeato offers the Basic plan at €70 per month per user and the Pro plan at €120 per month per user. These paid plans come with unlimited testing minutes and additional advanced features. For businesses with unique requirements, the Enterprise plan provides a customized experience with undisclosed pricing. All plans include email support, with priority support available for higher-tier subscribers. Repeato also offers pricing flexibility through upgrade, downgrade, and cancellation options, and discounts for non-profit organizations, educational institutions, and yearly commitments.

Waldo Pricing Overview

Waldo’s pricing framework is designed to cater to a variety of testing demands, starting with a free manual testing option that allows users to perform interactive checks on their apps. The ‘Release’ plan introduces automated end-to-end testing in a single concurrency setting, while the ‘Develop’ plan offers multi-concurrency testing and additional support for various languages and devices. Each plan is equipped with features like Session Explorer, debugging replays, and CI/CD integration, with customer support. Advanced features such as automated test version control, SCM integration, and parallel test runs are reserved for higher-tier plans. Waldo encourages users to start with the free option or request a demo to witness the full capabilities of their automated testing offerings.

Comparison of Repeato and Waldo Pricing Models

Both Repeato and Waldo provide tiered pricing models with free options that cater to individuals or smaller projects. They share a common approach of scaling up features and support as the plans become more premium. However, there are key differences to consider:

  • Plan Structure: Repeato prices its plans on a per-user basis, which may be beneficial for individual users or small teams, while Waldo’s plans seem to be structured around testing capabilities rather than user count, which could be advantageous for teams focusing on concurrency and efficiency.
  • Concurrency: Waldo specifically mentions multi-concurrency testing in its ‘Develop’ plan, which is a feature designed for teams needing to run multiple tests simultaneously. Repeato does not explicitly state concurrency options, which suggests that its plans may be more focused on the range of features rather than the number of concurrent tests.
  • Customization: Repeato offers an Enterprise plan with tailored solutions for large organizations, indicating a more custom approach for such clients. Waldo, while not explicitly mentioning an enterprise tier, encourages potential users to book a demo, hinting at the possibility of customized solutions.
  • Feature Accessibility: Both platforms offer a suite of testing features, but the availability of advanced features like priority support, advanced testing capabilities, and integration options vary between plans. Repeato includes priority support in its higher-tier plans, while Waldo offers advanced features like SCM integration and parallel runs in its more advanced plans.
  • Support and Integration: Both products offer email support across all plans, with Repeato offering priority support for higher tiers. Waldo emphasizes its integration capabilities with CI/CD pipelines, which can be a deciding factor for teams with established development workflows.

In summary, while both Repeato and Waldo cater to a range of users with their tiered pricing models, the key distinctions lie in how they structure their plans, the emphasis on concurrency, customization options for larger organizations, and the specific advanced features included in their respective plans.

Like this article? there’s more where that came from.