Choosing the right test automation platform can be a pivotal decision for your quality assurance process. In this article, we compare Testsigma, a low-code, AI-driven test automation tool that simplifies testing across mobile, web, and API applications, with Mabl, another low-code platform that integrates AI to enhance end-to-end testing for web applications.
While both offer codeless operations and AI capabilities, Testsigma provides a free plan, on-premise deployment, and physical device testing, distinguishing itself for versatility. Conversely, Mabl focuses on web applications with visual testing features, although it lacks a free plan and on-premise options. Join us as we delve into the nuances of both platforms to inform your selection.
Latest update: 1/31/2024, 5:18:29 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 Testsigma and Mabl
|Physical Device Testing
|Uses Computer Vision
|Ease Of Use
|very easy to learn
|very easy to learn
|Is Open Source
1. Rapid Test Automation: Users can automate most test cases quickly without needing expertise in specific languages or frameworks.
2. Customer Support: The support team is highly responsive and easily accessible directly through the platform.
3. Ease of Use: The platform is user-friendly, requiring minimal training to handle.
4. Test Step Grouping: This feature streamlines the development of new scripts by grouping test steps.
5. No-Script Automation: Offers a codeless approach to test automation, making it accessible to non-technical users.
6. Integration Capabilities: Testsigma allows for seamless integration with various tools, enhancing the automation suite.
7. Natural Language Processing (NLP): Testsigma uses NLP for test cases, making it intuitive to write tests in plain English.
8. Accessibility: It caters to users with non-technical backgrounds, allowing them to learn and use the platform effectively.
9. End-to-End Testing: It supports comprehensive testing, including validation of OTPs via Email and SMS.
10. Custom Functionality: Users can import custom code to extend functionality when required actions are not available.
1. Easy to implement and deploy across teams.
2. Comprehensive documentation with practical examples and strong support from the mabl team.
3. Supports multi-browser and API testing, including Postman collection imports for end-to-end user flow automation.
4. No infrastructure maintenance required with a low-code approach suitable for non-technical teams.
5. Demonstrates good return on investment when compared to the cost of hiring full-time testing personnel.
6. Facilitates rapid test case development with built-in auto-healing capabilities, essential for Agile environments.
7. Features an intuitive visual trainer for quick creation and updating of test cases.
8. Supports multi-tab testing in browsers and captures visual comparisons and performance metrics.
9. Enables efficient test creation through features like data tables for testing multiple scenarios.
10. Offers SaaS automation, detailed test results, and a new learning platform (mabl University) for user training.
1. Limited Database Testing: Currently, Testsigma does not support direct database testing, though some validation can be done using custom functions.
2. Reporting Features: The reporting capabilities are somewhat limited and could be improved.
3. Performance Issues: Some users have reported slower execution times and non-functional cloud devices.
4. End-to-End Testing Complexity: While possible, some users find end-to-end testing to be challenging.
5. Salesforce Integration: There is a need for improved integration features with Salesforce.
6. Ticket Tracking: Improvements could be made in how user-raised tickets are tracked.
7. Desktop Application Automation: Testsigma does not currently support the automation of desktop applications.
8. Element Inspection Limitations: Some elements cannot be inspected directly, requiring workarounds like Sikuli for interaction.
9. Occasional Errors: Users have encountered intermittent errors, sometimes due to platform maintenance or upgrades.
10. Lack of Transparency: There is a need for better communication regarding maintenance and updates that may affect test performance.
1. Does not support native mobile test automation.
2. Lacks integration with some popular test management tools like Testrail.
3. Limited reporting options and areas for improvement in security features.
4. Occasional discrepancies between cloud and local executions, leading to unexpected failures.
5. The mabl documentation could benefit from more detailed, specific examples.
6. The use of labels for test organization can be confusing and has a learning curve.
7. Challenges with the Trainer incorrectly recording steps, requiring re-recording to fix issues.
8. Inconsistencies with tests that only run successfully within a test plan and not independently.
9. Lack of a more extensive community for user support compared to open-source alternatives.
10. Auto-healing feature can be overly aggressive and may incorrectly modify tests without user intent.
Pricing Overview: Testsigma vs. Mabl
Testsigma provides a test automation platform with a tiered pricing structure. The offerings start with a Free plan, suitable for small projects with limited testing needs. As needs grow, Testsigma offers a Pro plan, which includes unlimited testing minutes and extensive device and browser support. The Pro plan is aimed at fast-growing teams looking for robust testing capabilities. For larger organizations or Test Centers of Excellence, Testsigma introduces an Enterprise plan. This plan comes with advanced features such as enhanced security, unlimited storage, and custom data retention options. Both Pro and Enterprise plans are customizable, with pricing provided upon request.
Mabl adopts a fully personalized pricing model. Instead of predefined plans, Mabl invites potential clients to engage in a pricing discussion that will lead to a custom quote. This quote is based on the specific testing requirements of the software team, including test coverage and scalability needs. Mabl emphasizes the value provided by their service, with statistics such as a 90% increase in test coverage and a significant reduction in bugs. The pricing process includes an ROI analysis and market comparison, ensuring that clients understand the cost-benefit of the Mabl solution.
Comparison of Pricing Models
- Custom Pricing: Both Testsigma and Mabl offer custom pricing for their services. This approach ensures that customers pay for the features and scalability they need.
- Tailored to Team Size and Needs: Each company caters to teams of different sizes and adjusts their offerings based on the complexity of the customer’s testing requirements.
- Contact Sales for Quotes: Customers are encouraged to discuss their specific needs with the sales team to receive a personalized price quote.
- Pricing Tiers vs. Personalized Quotes: Testsigma provides a clear tiered structure with defined plans (Free, Pro, Enterprise), while Mabl solely relies on personalized quotes without predefined tiers.
- Included Features: Testsigma’s Pro and Enterprise plans offer unlimited testing minutes and storage, which is not explicitly mentioned in Mabl’s description. Mabl, however, focuses on the outcome of their service, such as increased test coverage and faster test creation.
- ROI Analysis and Market Comparison: Mabl offers a custom ROI analysis and a comparison with other market solutions as part of their pricing discussion, which is not mentioned by Testsigma.
- Visibility: Testsigma provides an outline of what is included in each plan, even though the exact pricing is not listed. Mabl prefers to discuss all details in a one-on-one pricing session, offering less upfront information about their service tiers.
While both Testsigma and Mabl offer customized pricing models that cater to software teams’ specific needs, they differ in their approach to presenting their plans and services. Testsigma provides a tier-based model with the option for customization, whereas Mabl focuses entirely on a personalized pricing strategy. Potential customers of Testsigma have a clearer initial understanding of what to expect in each tier, while Mabl customers will engage in a more consultative approach to determine their exact needs and corresponding pricing.