Testers are often told they should automate parts of their testing, but time constraints and shifting priorities can make that tough. Another challenge is having team-mates who aren’t comfortable with code, so we need alternatives.
Low-code test automation tools help by allowing fast, record-and-playback test creation and a gentler learning curve. It’s not all sunshine and roses, though. These tools bring benefits and drawbacks.
When low-code test automation tools can be a good choice, and when it’s better to roll up your sleeves and use tools like Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, and so on.
First-hand insights into the strengths and limitations of several low-code tools in a real project context
How to choose a tool by trial and comparison
After reading, let’s discuss …
Have you used similar tools? What did you like and what frustrated you?
Any extra tips for picking the right low-code tool?
Thank you! I spent quite a bit of time, along with my teammates, trying out and researching several of these tools, and if you are in a similar situation, I’m hoping you can find something useful in the article.
In my work, I have done poc projects with UIPath and Katalon Studio. I have personally stuck with Cypress and am now looking into Playwright.
From the old QTP and UFT days right up to these newer tools, I have noticed they tend to be really heavy on system resources. They also are’t very flexible when it comes to integrating with test management and CI tools.
I completely agree with you on the pricing issue. A few years ago, I actually managed tool vendors and licensing, and the models vary wildly from single licenses to small group and even organization wide packages. On top of the test automation tools, these companies often bundle in other tools. Unless a company has deep pockets or tieups, its hard to afford them, especially now that more big players are entering the market.
I am actually planning to write something up about all of this.
A couple of additional issues I noticed with several of these tools is that they get confused when navigating to new tabs or going back to previous times.
Also, when using relative URLs some will automatically add escape character, which will cause the ULR to not work, or at time the config file will not get picked up, during test setup phase and the test will fail.