Top 15 Applitools Alternatives

Visual regression testing is the most popular type of testing for user interfaces. It helps to compare the wireframe with the actual implemented user interface. There are several tools in the market that help perform visual regression testing. Applitools, Testsigma, and Percy are the most popular tools for visual comparison. 

Earlier Applitools captured a major market share however in recent years organizations are shifting from Applitools to other tools. The curated list of Applitools alternatives helps in the migration of your visual regression framework.

What is visual regression testing?

Visual regression testing is a software testing technique that evaluates the visual appearance of a software application’s user interface (UI) or graphical user interface (GUI). It aims to verify the application’s visual elements such as text, colors, images, and fonts. 

Visual regression testing is often called by different names such as visual testing, and visual UI testing.

What is Applitools?

Applitools is a visual testing tool that aims to validate all elements of an interface, including text, images, layouts, videos, etc. Applitools is a commercial tool developed and managed by Applitools, Inc. Applitool uses AI-based visual validation, hence it provides stable and accurate results across platforms and devices.

Reasons to Consider Applitools Alternatives

Let’s discuss the reasons to consider the Applitools alternatives.

• Cost: Applitools can be more expensive than similar testing tools. Organizations having small teams and limited budgets struggle to adapt. 
• Learning curve: The learning curve for Applitools is comparatively high. The company needs to spend on high licensing costs and then they need to spend on training and learning, to use the tool effectively.
• Limited support for manual testing: Applitools is designed for automated visual regression testing. Support for manual visual testing is limited. Teams that rely on manual testing and don’t have the required skill sets to automate are finding the tool-less helpful
• Limited customization: Though Applitools comes with a wide range of features, based on the business requirement one might be interested in customization. Applitools supports limited customization.

What are the factors to consider while selecting an Applitools Alternative Tool?

Ease of use: Tools should be easy to use, and they should encourage self-learning.

Setup and installation: Setup and installation are a major phase of any automation framework. This may also demand skilled resources. Setup and installation should be easier.

Budget Constraints: The budget factor varies from organization to organization. However, commercial tools require you to pay license fees, and open-source tools are free. Commercial tools will provide dedicated support and additional benefits.

Visual comparison technique: Each tool uses a different mechanism to compare the images or screenshots. The tool should incorporate modern technologies, and it should provide the most stable and accurate results.

Integration: The tool should support integration with third-party tools. It may be CI/CD tools, versioning tools, software management tools, or bug-tracking tools. 

Code-based vs No-code: Skilled resources are often costly. If the tool supports no code testing then anyone can automate. Choice varies from organization to organization, however, it is easy to address the skill gaps with no code tool in place.

Reporting: The reporting should be in-depth and easily understandable. You should be able to customize the reports based on the need. If the tool provides all required reports in a single place such as functional, API testing, and visual testing reports, then it is easy to showcase them for stakeholders. 

Top 15 Alternatives for Applitools

There are many visual testing tools in the market. If you are migrating from Applitools it might take a week just to research and shortlist the alternatives. The below set of tools is curated for you, which may help in choosing the best fit for your organization. 

Note: Tools below are not ranked, sorted randomly

Testsigma

Testsigma is an AI-based visual regression testing tool that supports many advanced features. It is a commercial tool that offers no code feature. Testsigma supports many different types of testing such as end-to-end functional testing, API testing, cross-browser testing, responsive testing, etc. This can be considered as the best alternative to Applitools.

Features of Testsigma

• It is a SaaS SaaS-based tool; no setup is required.
• No-code tool hence, anyone can perform visual testing automation with few clicks
• It can be accessed from any platform that supports a browser.
• Testsigma supports automated visual testing
• Granular-level reporting, which helps to share the results based on the targeted audience
• Testsigma can be integrated with CI/CD tools and other versioning tools to automate the testing process
• It supports both dynamic visual testing and static visual testing
• Supports functional-level visual testing
• Supports both mobile and web devices
• Both visual testing results and functional results are available in a single customizable dashboard
• A dedicated technical support team to resolve your issues
• Comparatively less learning curve with no code automation

Cons of Testsigma

• Testsigma is not a free tool, you need to pay a small license fee to use it.
• It doesn’t support manual visual tests, however, manual tester can automate easily with no code automation.
• Code-based visual testing is not supported.

Automate your visual regression tests, 10x faster, with Testsigma

Percy

Percy is a visual testing platform. Percy is owned by Browserstack Limited. It supports many functional automation tools such as Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, etc. Percy can be integrated into your functional test libraries and can perform visual regression as part of functional testing.

Features of Percy

• SaaS-based tool, no installation required, and can be accessed from the browser.
• Supports many programming languages such as Java, JavaScript, .Net, Python, etc.
• Can be integrated into functional testing frameworks Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, etc.
• It can be integrated into CI/CD pipelines
• Supports review and collaboration features
• Pixel-based visual comparison mechanism
• Provides an option to set the level of comparison

Cons of Percy

• It is a commercial tool so licensing costs are involved
• Doesn’t support No code testing, hence difficult for manual testers to automate
• The learning curve is high
• Doesn’t support desktop client application testing

Percy vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• The learning curve is high in Percy. The learning curve is low in Testsigma
• Percy requires coding knowledge. Testsigma doesn’t require any programming knowledge.
• Dynamic visual testing requires a lot of code to be written using one of the functional testing frameworks. Testsigma doesn’t require you to code.
• Unlike Testsigma, Percy doesn’t provide granular-level reporting.

Playwright

Playwright is an automation tool that supports both functional and visual testing. Playwright is open source test automation framework and it is managed by Microsoft. It supports many programming languages such as Java, Javascript, Python, and .Net. It can be considered as the best open-source alternative to Applitools.

Features of Playwright

• Playwright is an open-source tool, thus, no need to pay licensing fees.
• Both functional testing and visual testing can be done using a single framework
• It supports Java, Javascript, .Net, and Python programming languages
• Playwright supports Linux, Windows, and macOS platforms
• Automated tests can be integrated with CI/CD pipelines
• Tests can be integrated with cloud-based testing providers such as Browserstack, SauceLabs, etc.
• Detailed documentation

Cons of Playwright

• Doesn’t support no-code testing
• The learning curve is high
• Doesn’t support desktop application testing
• Doesn’t support manual testing

Playwright vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Playwright doesn’t support no-code testing hence it is difficult for manual testers to automate visual regression testing scenarios. Testsigma supports no code automation manual testers can easily automate the visual tests.
• The playwright is not a SaaS-based tool, so for responsive visual testing organizations need to subscribe to testing providers platforms such as Browserstack, Saucelabas, Lambdatest, etc. Testsigma provides all these features in-built without any additional cost.
• Playwright is an open source tool, and there is no need to pay a license fee. Whereas Testsigma is a commercial tool one needs to pay for the license.
• Playwright has a high learning curve compared to Testsigma
• The reporting feature is limited and requires additional configuration and implementation in Playwright. Testsigma provides all reporting features out of the box.

Galen Framework

Galen Framework is an open-source framework for testing the application’s layout and responsive design. Behind the scenes, the Galen Framework uses Selenium to launch the browser and test the elements on the web page. It uses the Galen spec language for defining the scripts.

Features of Galen Framework

• It is open source, and no additional licensing cost is involved
• Galen Framework provides multiple options to install such as npm-based, manual installation, etc.
• Galen framework is very helpful in comparing the minute level of web application design
• It can be integrated with popular cloud testing providers such as Browserstack, SauceLabs, etc.
• It validates the responsive pages using the Galen spec and manipulating the CSS hence, it is the most accurate

Cons of the Galen Framework

• Galen framework uses the Galen spec languages, which is not a generic language hence it takes a lot of effort and time to learn the tool.
• It doesn’t support no-code automation.
• Manual testing is not supported.
• Reports are provided in either TestNG or HTML reports
• Additional integration is required to configure and send the emailable reports
• Limited documentation, and it is very difficult for beginners

Galen Framework vs Testsigma Visual Regression Testing

• Galen Framework doesn’t support no-code automation hence, it is difficult to adopt. Testsigma supports no code automation organization that can shift to visual testing automation swiftly with existing resources.
• Galen Framework is open source and has no cost involved to procure. Testsigma is the commercial tool you need to pay licensing costs.
• Test execution reports cannot be accessed outside of the system unless you have configured them using cloud vendors. Testsigma reports can be accessed from anywhere.
• Galen framework doesn’t provide infrastructure for responsive testing. Testsigma provides everything out of the box.

BackstopJS

BackstopJS is a nodeJS-based visual testing tool. It is an open-source visual regression testing framework. It supports the Playwright and Puppeteer script for functional visual regression. BackstopJS is a code-based automation tool.

Features of BackstopJS

• Easy to install using the npm module syntax
• Open source, no additional licensing cost.
• Easy to integrate into the CI/CD
• In-built report generation helps to identify the bottlenecks easily
• It can be configured with multiple devices, operating systems, and viewports
• Offers a high level of customization

Cons of  BackstopJS

• Though it is easy to install, setting up the framework may be time-consuming.
• Functional-level visual testing requires coding knowledge.
• It is optimized only for Chromium browsers
• It cannot be used as an independent tool, you need to rely on either the Playwright or puppeteer framework.
• Documentation is not great, only limited information is available
• Community support is not that great

BackstopJS vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• BackstopJs requires time and effort to configure, and Testsigma doesn’t require any setup.
• BackstopJS requires additional framework integration, such as Playwright or Pupeeteer. Testsigma provides functional visual testing out of the box.
• It is difficult for manual testers to switch to automation because of the high learning curve. Testsigma offers no code automation hence, it is easy to automate visual testing.
• BackstopJS is open source; hence no licensing cost is involved however Testsigma requires you to pay the licensing cost.

VisualCeption

VisualCeption is an open-source visual testing tool. Internally it uses multiple automation tools. Selenium for launching the browser and capturing the screenshot, Javascript for calculating the position, and Imagick for cropping the images and comparison. Finally, it uses Codeception to handle the exceptions.

Features of VisualCeption

• It is open source. No additional licensing cost
• Generates good reports for failed tests
• It takes advantage of all open-source tools to make a strong visual comparison tool.
• Though the framework setup is complex, once done it is easy to use

Cons of VisualCeption

• It cannot be used as an independent tool, you can only use it in combination with the Codeception tool.
• Setting up a framework is time-consuming.
• It uses unfamiliar syntax, hence the learning curve is high
• Doesn’t support manual visual testing
• Limited and incomplete documentation makes beginners confused

VisualCeptions vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• VisualCeption has a dependency on other tools and cannot be used as a standalone visual testing tool. Testsigma doesn’t require any other tool to be installed.
• Framework setup requires a lot of time and effort. Testsigma doesn’t require them at all.
• With limited and confusing documentation, community support is less. Testsigma provides 24/7 assistance to resolve all your issues.
• Cannot access the reports from outside. Testsigma reports can be accessed from anywhere over the internet.

Vizregress

Vizregress is an .Net-based visual comparison tool. It is an open-source project. It supports both BDD and TDD frameworks. Specflow BDD can be easily integrated with Vizregress to perform the Visual Testing. It uses the pixel-based image comparison technique to compare the visual images.

Features of Vizregress

• It is an open-source framework and a free tool
• It extensively supports .Net projects with SpecFlow BDD
• Provides an option to ignore the specific zones during visual testing
• Pixel-based analysis makes test results stable

Cons of Vizregress

• This was created as an experimental project, the code may be outdated as there was no development
• No documentation
• No community support
• Supports only .Net framework
• Requires coding knowledge

Vizregress vs Testsigma

• Vizregress is a legacy project that may not fit well for modern requirements and it is not enhanced. Testsigma uses the AI-based algorithm for visual testing hence it supports all modern web pages.
• No documentation or community support. Testsigma provides support and answers all your queries on time.

Aye Spy

Aye Spy was built with inspiration from Wraith and BackstopJS. It is an open-source nodeJS-based tool. It can be installed from npm libraries. In the background, it uses the Selenium grid.

Features of AyeSpy

• Easy to setup and install
• It supports Amazon S3 bucket storage for storing snapshots
• It is open-source and free
• Parallel execution can compare up to 40 images per minute
• It generates the report once the build is completed

Cons of AyeSpy

• Difficult to understand the internal working as the documentation is limited
• Requires use of Javascript programming languages
• The generated report is not comprehensive
• Fewer options for customization

Aye Spy vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Aye Spy Reports are not comprehensive, Testsigma provides comprehensive reports
• Aye Spy requires a Selenium grid to be configured in the background, which is an additional complexity. Testsigma doesn’t demand any additional setup.
• It requires coding knowledge. Testsigma doesn’t require any coding knowledge.

Webdriver.io Visual Testing

WebdriverIO is a popular automation tool. It supports a third-party visual regression testing plugin for visual testing. WebdriverIO is truly open-source and community-driven. The Visual testing dependencies can be installed into the webdriverIO framework and can be used.

Features of WebdriverIO Visual Testing

• Truly open-source and free
• Both functional testing and visual testing can be in one place
• Easy to integrate with CI/CD tools
• It supports the Javascript programming language

Cons of WebdriverIO Visual Testing

• No built-in support by WebdriverIO. Visual testing is supported via the third-party library. Hence long-term support is not guaranteed.
• Requires to install the dependencies and configure them
• Though webdriverIO functional testing has good documentation. The visual testing module has very little documentation and is difficult to configure
• Difficult to configure the customized reporting for visual testing

WebdriverIO Visual Testing vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• WebdriverIO visual testing is supported via a third-party library. Testsigma supports visual testing out of the box; no configuration is needed.
• WebdriverIO visual testing requires coding knowledge. Testsigma doesn’t require any coding knowledge
• If you are stuck with issues, it is difficult to resolve as there is no dedicated team to support you. Testsigma provides technical support assistance

Functionize Visual Testing

Functionalize visual testing is a commercial tool by  Functionize, Inc. It supports no code testing. You can perform full-page or element-based visual testing. Visual testing can be part of your test cases. Furthermore, it helps to perform the visual comparison of files.

Features of Functionalize

• SaaS-based commercial visual comparison platform
• It supports both element-based and full-page visual testing
• You can compare different types of files using Functionize
• It supports no code automation
• You can include visual testing verification anywhere in your automation scripts

Cons of Functionize

• It is not a free tool, you need to pay for the license.
• Pricing is not disclosed on the website
• Limited documentation, difficult for beginners to conduct POC

Functionize vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Functionize documentation is not available to the general public hence it is difficult to understand and conduct the POC. Testsigma documentation is clear: all resources can be accessed by anyone.
• Functionalize supports visual file comparison. Testsigma is yet to support file comparison features.
• No information on reporting and sharing options. Testsigma supports granular level shareable reports and can be accessed from anywhere.

Resemble.js

Resemble.js is a nodeJS-based visual regression tool that can be used as an alternative to Applitools. It can be used for image analysis and comparison. It is an open-source framework.

Features of Resemble.js

• Easy to install and setup
• Supports only Javascript as a programming language
• It uses the power of PhantomCSS for image analysis
• It is open-source and free
• Supports manual testing. Manual comparison can be done using https://rsmbl.github.io/Resemble.js/  web page

Cons of Resemble.js

• Achieving element-based dynamic visual testing is challenging
• The Resemble.Js internally uses the PhantomCSS which is outdated and no longer maintained hence long-term support is not guaranteed.
• It requires in-depth coding knowledge

 Resemble.js vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Resemble.js internally uses the PhantomCSS hence long-term support is not guaranteed. Testsigma is a commercial application that has a dedicated team to support visual testing.
• Element-based dynamic visual testing is challenging. Testsigma supports both static and dynamic visual testing.
• Resemble.js requires JavaScript coding knowledge. Testsigma doesn’t require any coding knowledge.
• Resemble.js supports manual visual testing. Testsigma is an automation tool that doesn’t support manual testing

Cypress Visual Testing

Cypress is a popular tool for functional test automation. It supports visual testing via a third-party visual testing library called cypress-plugin-snapshots. There are many other visual comparison plugins available on the Cypress plugin page you are free to hook one of these into your Cypress framework.

Features of Cypress Visual Testing

• It is an open-source platform, and no need to pay license fees
• All your functional and visual regression tests are in the same place, hence you get both reports once you execute
• You can perform both full-page visual testing and element-based visual testing.
• It supports the JavaScript programming language.

Cons of Cypress Visual Testing

• Visual testing in Cypress is not built in and supported via a third-party plugin hence long-term support is not guaranteed.
• Requires coding knowledge to use.
• You need to rely on cloud platform providers for responsive testing

Cypress Visual Testing vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Cypress requires coding knowledge. Testsigma is no code visual testing tool.
• Visual testing in Cypress is supported by a third-party library hence long-term support is not guaranteed. Testsigma supports visual testing out of the box.
• Visual testing in Cypress requires installing the dependencies and configuring them. Testsigma Visual testing doesn’t require any configuration.
• Cypress Visual testing requires cloud vendor integration to test across the devices. Testsigma provides all these features out of the box.

Chromatic

Chromatic is a proprietary visual testing tool that supports multiple browsers and parallel execution by default. It is developed and owned by Chroma Software Inc. It is made by the maintainers of the popular UI design framework storybook.

Features of Chromatic

• It is a simple and user-friendly tool
• It is available in both free and premium paid versions
• Supports multiple browsers, Chrome, Chromium, edge, safari, etc.
• It can be used for Responsive viewport testing
• Run tests in parallel by default
• It produces a stable test result
• Easy to integrate with CI/CD pipeline

Cons of Chromatic

• It is UI developer-friendly, the tester might get confused with the workflow
• Dynamic visual testing requires coding in JavaScript.
• If you need better and advanced features you need to pay the licensing cost
• Lacks the documentation
• Limited community support

Chromatic vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• Chromatic tests cannot be used as part of your functional tests. Testsigma tests can be part of your functional tests.
• Element-level testing requires JavaScript coding. Testsigma doesn’t require coding.
• Chromatic reports are limited. Testsigma provides comprehensive reports.

Visual Regression Tracker (VRT)

Visual Regression Tracker is an open-source visual regression testing tool. It is an automation framework independent tool so no need to stick to any specific automation tool. You can use it in any of your favorite automation tools.

Features of Visual Regression Tracker

• Open-source and free
• Platform independent supports web, mobile, or any device
• Provides baseline image, and history tracker
• Ignore regions that you don’t need to compare
• Supports JS, Java, Python, and .Net programming language
• Setup is provided as a docker image
• Self-hosted, hence your data stays safe
• It can compare PDF files as well

Cons of Visual Regression Tracker

• It doesn’t support manual testing
• Element-level visual regression requires an agent. That may be Playwright or conceptJs or Cypress etc.
• Reporting is not comprehensive
• The setup and integration require technical knowledge
• It requires you to write the script in a programming language

Visual Regression Tracker vs Testsigma

• Visual Regression Tracker(VRT) supports comparison of PDF files. Testsigma doesn’t support PDF comparison support
• VRT requires you to use a programming language. Testsigma doesn’t require any programming knowledge
• Reporting is not comprehensive. Testsigma provides granular-level reporting

Katalon Studio Visual Testing

Katalon Studio is a functional testing tool that supports visual testing as one of the features. Katalon is a commercial tool that is managed and owned by Katalon, Inc. Visual Regression testing is supported by Katalon using the keyword-driven method. If you are already using the Katalon tests, you can just include visual testing keywords to start Visual testing.

Pros of Katalon Studio Visual Testing

• Supports alerts for critical UI mismatches
• AI-based comparison methods
• supports parallel execution
• Functional tests can be extended to perform visual regression tests
• Supports both mobile and web interfaces

Cons of Katalon Studio Visual Testing

• The Katalon license price is expensive. It may be problematic for small teams or organizations.
• To execute tests on different browsers you might need to subscribe to the cloud services.
• Support for no code visual testing is limited.

Katalon vs Testsigma Visual Testing

• The Katalon license fee is expensive. Testsigma license may be comparatively less expensive.
• You may need to subscribe to additional services for cross-browser and device testing. Testsigma supports all basic testing with less cost.
• No coding has limited support. Testsigma only supports no code hence it works like charm.

Functional testing may not be enough to achieve high customer satisfaction. Functional testing doesn’t guarantee the correctness of the user interface. To ensure the user interface is behaving as expected the visual regression testing is crucial. Applitools, Testsigma, Percy, and Chromatic are a few popular tools in the market however as we listed, many test automation tools are less explored. Organizations are shifting from Applitools due to many disadvantages and for their own benefits. Testsigma is the closest alternative for Applitools. Based on your budget constraints, you may also be interested in open-source tools. Remember, open-source tools don’t guarantee long-term support and maintenance. Furthermore, the open-source tool requires many configurations and, in turn, requires skilled resources.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is the best alternative to Applitools?

There are many alternatives to Applitools. However, based on similarity, Testsigma can be considered as the closest alternative.