Best 15 Ghost Inspector Alternatives List to Look For

Today, there are many no-code automation tools in the market, that help to automate manual test cases without knowing any programming language. This also helped manual QA engineers who are aspiring to become a test automation specialist. Ghost Inspector is one such tool that supports no code automation. Let’s checkout the best ghost inspector alternatives in the market.

What is a Ghost Inspector?

Ghost Inspector is a cloud-based web application and website testing tool. It is a commercial tool that supports no code automation. It also supports advanced features to handle complex scenarios using programming languages.

Ghost Inspector Alternatives Feature Comparision Chart:

Here is a comparison table of the top 5 tools for ghost inspector alternatives with Testsigma.

Best Ghost Inspector Alternatives List to Look For

Organizations like the no code automation feature, however, the limitation of Ghost Inspector makes them think twice about migrating. Organizations are looking for alternatives that can fulfill all of their testing requirements. Below is the list of Ghost Inspector alternatives tools carefully picked based on the features and limitations.

Testsigma

Testsigma is an AI-driven test automation tool , one of the best Ghost Inspector Alternatives. It supports no code testing. Testsigma smartly converts plain English test cases into automation scripts. It supports all major browsers such as Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Edge. It also supports mobile web testing and native mobile app testing.

Pros of Testsigma

• Supports no code features. So even non-technical team members can contribute to the automation.
• Reduced maintenance, as it comes with an in-built AI feature
• Supports multiple browsers Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Edge. Which helps to perform browser compatibility testing seamlessly across the browsers.
• Detailed logs help to quickly debug the failed test cases.
• Video recording and screenshots of execution help in root cause analysis of failed test cases
• CI/CD integration support helps you to integrate with popular DevOps tools such as Jenkins, CircleCI, etc.
• Testsigma tests and artifacts can be accessed remotely from anywhere.
• Sharable and Customizable reports make the reporting rich and increase the readability
• Dedicated technical support to answer your queries and resolve the issues

Cons of Testsigma

• Testsigma has both open-source and commercial versions, the open-source version has only limited features.
• To use the Testsigma commercial version you need to pay license fees.
• Community support is comparatively low, but they have great support

BugBug

The BugBug is a relatively new tool, it started in 2019. However, within 5 years it has evolved a lot. Bugbug is a member of the code automation family. It supports functional and UI test automation.

Pros of BugBug

• It’s a no-code automation tool. Prior technical knowledge is optional to use.
• An advanced feature of this tool supports editing the test scripts using Javascript.
• It can generate different types of reports, including pdf report
• BugBug tests can be executed locally or in the Cloud
• Easy to integrate with CI/CD pipeline tools such as Jenkins, Bitbucket, Gitlab, Travis, etc.
• Tests can be  executed on a scheduled basis or on-demand
• Supports all chromium-based browsers
• Dedicated technical support via Email

Limitations of Bugbug

• BugBug is a commercial tool, subscription cost is involved in to use
• It doesn’t support mobile applications, it supports only web application
• API Testing cannot be performed using the BugBug
• Only Chromium-based browsers are supported. You cannot execute the tests on Firefox and Safari
• It supports only functional testing, other testing types such as visual testing, and accessibility testing, are not supported
• Technical support is available only through email
• Though it supports reporting, lacks the customization

Mabl

Mabl is a modern automation tool. It is a low-code commercial automation tool. It is designed to test the end-to-end scenarios of your application. Though it is new to the market, it supports many valuable features, including performance monitoring.

Pros of Mabl

• Low code architecture helps to contribute to the automation by non-technical team members
• It supports application performance monitoring feature
• You can also create and manage API tests
• Accessibility testing can be performed easily with Mabl
• Mabl can support all major browsers such as Chrome, Chromium, Safari, and Firefox
• Easy to integrate with software management tools like Jenkins, Bitbucket, Gitlab, Github, and Postman
• It also supports automation scripting using programming languages
• Test artifacts can be accessed from anywhere, as it is a cloud-based tool.

Cons of Mabl

• Mabl is available as commercial software so cost is involved to use.
• It doesn’t support visual testing
• The intelligent automation feature is supported only for low-code tests 
• Slow test executions are reported by many users
• It doesn’t show consistent behaviors across different web elements
• Test reporting customization is limited

Selenium

Selenium is a very popular test automation tool. It started an open-source culture for test automation. It is an open-source test automation tool that supports many languages Java, C#, Python, JavaScript, etc. Recently Selenium also introduced a record and playback tool called Selenium IDE which works similarly to no code automation tool. Many commercial no-code automation tools are built with Selenium.

Pros of Selenium

• Open source tool and free to use
• Supports many browsers Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge
• Platform independent supports Windows, Linux, and Mac
• Supports C#, Java, JavaScript, Python, PHP, and Ruby programming languages
• Huge community support and a lot of online resources
• Easy to integrate with third-party tools that fall under DevOps, software management tools, etc.
• Highly customizable and extendable.

Cons of Selenium

• Though Selenium programming-based frameworks work well, Selenium IDE, a record and playback tool, doesn’t provide stable execution.
• One needs to know the programming language to utilize the Selenium feature completely
• Selenium doesn’t provide the cloud execution feature by default
• No in-built reporter support
• Though it is a highly customizable tool, it requires good technical knowledge.
• No support for other testing types such as API Testing, Visual Testing, and Accessibility testing.

Rainforest QA

RainforestQA is different from other tools, as it provides both automation tools and QA resource support. The RainforestQA has a no-code automation tool that fulfills many software testing requirements. One of the interesting features of RainforestQA is it supports crowd-testing.

Pros of Rainforest QA

• Codeless testing can reduce the burdens of QA engineers
• Crowdtesting makes software testing more cost-effective as it uses the human network to test
• It supports many software development tools integration and also supports DevOps integration
• Tests can be triggered using the mobile or using the browser
• Detailed execution report helps in the analysis

Cons of RainforestQA

• It is commercial software so licensing cost is involved
• No support for API testing
• Other testing types such as visual testing, and accessibility testing are not supported
• Only supports limited tools to integrate

Testim

Testim, founded in late 2014, supports the execution and maintenance of test automation. It is an AI-driven tool. Testim is acquired by Tricentis.  Testim is capable of supporting both mobile and web applications.

Pros of Testim

• It is a no-code testing tool, hence no technical skills are required to automate
• It supports API testing within the functional tests
• Easy to reuse the components which make automation test development faster
• Visual editor makes it easy to write the automation scripts
• The advanced feature also supports coding, which helps to cover the edge case scenarios

Cons of Testim

• Lacks the detailed reporting feature, hence it is difficult to debug and analyze the issue
• Tools integration capability is limited
• It may not be suitable for complex applications where many third-party integration is involved
• No in-built support for visual testing
• Testim is a commercial tool not free to use

Leapwork

Leapwork uses flowchart-based visual automation testing, which makes it unique in the automation industry. It is capable of automating business applications such as Dynamics365, Salesforce, etc. Because of its powerful AI capability many large organizations are using Leapwork.

Pros of Leapwork

• It supports no code automation, hence programming language skills are no more barrier to automate
• Highly reusable components make automation faster
• Data level insights, video recorders, and logs make it easy to debug
• It can trigger tests on the cloud or in your local machine
• It supports cross-technology automation such as AWS, Salesforce, IBM mainframe, Oracle tools, etc.
• Easy to integrate with CI/CD pipelines

Cons of Leapwork

• It is a commercial tool hence, a license fee is involved
• Initial setup is difficult
• Limited integration to the CI/CD tools
• It supports limited reporting features and lacks customization, a detailed dashboard, etc.
• Edge case scenarios require the coding knowledge to automate
• Mobile app test automation has limited feature

Katalon Studio

Katalon Studio is one of the major players in the automation industry. It supports many features including web, API, mobile testing, and other testing types. Katalon as an application suite provides many different apps. It is also capable of executing tests on the cloud. Katalon is pricier compared to other automation tools.

Pros of Katalon Studio

• Katalon supports Windows, Mac, and Linux environments
• It supports desktop, API, web, and mobile applications
• Cross-browser testing can be performed by executing tests against Chrome, Firefox, Edge, and Safari browser
• It supports integration with many CI/CD tools
• Many third-party tools can be hooked into the Katalon studio framework
• Katalon Studio comes with two variants free version with limited features and a priced version with advanced features
• User-friendly IDE helps to write a test faster

Cons of Katalon Studio

• It is not an open-source. The commercial license price can change as the year passes
• Community support is not as great as other tools
• As the tool is bundled with many features, users are facing performance issues
• It supports only groovy programming language
• No code tool doesn’t generate stable scripts, and tests become flaky at times

Playwright

Playwright is an open-source test automation tool backed by Microsoft. The initial version was released in the year 2020 and it has evolved a lot since then. Initially, it was released as a functional testing tool, today it supports API, functional testing, visual testing, and accessibility testing. Considering the available open-source frameworks, it is the most popular one, as it ships everything ready. Once you install the tool you can start scripting. The reporting, logs, video recorder, and trace viewer are notable features of the Playwright.

Pros of Playwright

• Open source hence free to use
• Frequent releases fix any bugs that are involved in the previous version. QA engineers do not need to wait for years to fix the bug.
• Supports video recording, screenshots, console logs, and trace viewers. This makes the Playwright unique and helps the QA engineers to debug and analyze the script easily.
• Playwright supports many browsers such as Chrome, Chromium, Firefox, Edge, and Webkit(Safari) browsers.
• It is platform-independent you can execute the test on Windows, Linux, and macOS environments without any additional configurations
• QA engineers are free to choose from JavaScript, Java, Python, and C# programming languages
• It comes with an in-built HTML reporter
• Supports CI/CD integration
• No code support via the test generator

Cons of Playwright

• Doesn’t support native mobile testing
• Cloud testing is not supported as an in-built feature, you need to integrate with third-party vendors such as Browserstack or Saucelabs
• The script generator doesn’t output the stable tests hence test becomes flaky
• Good programming skills are required to build a stable and robust framework
• Playwright needs installation and configuration locally on a physical machine to write the automation scripts.

SmartBear TestComplete

SmartBear TestComplete is the most used commercial tool. It comes with a rich IDE which helps to understand and start testing easily for beginners. It can support web, mobile, and desktop applications. TestComplete also provides rich reporting and a dashboard.

Pros of TestComplete

• It supports many scripting languages like JavaScript, VBScript, and Python.
• Supports cross-browser testing
• Third-party tools can be integrated easily
• Rich reporting and dashboard for analytics
• Feature-rich IDE for test management and scripting

Cons of TestComplete

• TestComplete supports only the Windows operating system
• QA engineer needs to understand the framework and commands, hence there is a considerable learning curve
• TestComplete has performance issues on lower configuration machines.
• It is a license-heavy tool, small organizations may not be able to afford

WebdriverIO

WebdriverIO is an open-source JavaScript framework. It is a pure community-driven framework. It is built on top of Selenium to eliminate major challenges in the Selenium framework such as reporting, logging, and other customizations.

Pros of WebdriverIO

• It is an open source no cost is involved in to use
• WedberiverIO enriches the Selenium capabilities hence it can support cross-browser testing.
• Supports a variety of reporting types which makes WebdriverIO unique
• It is a highly extensible framework, there are many community-driven plugins available for free.
• It is a nodeJS-based framework so it can support all different operating systems
• CI/CD pipeline integration can be done easily
• Supports cloud-based testing with third-party providers

Cons of WebdriverIO

• Community support is less compared to Selenium
• Difficult to set up the framework, it requires a good level of programming languages
• It supports only JavaScript programming languages
• Visual comparison and Accessibility testing are not in-built
• API testing is not supported by default

 Cypress

Cypress is a modern open-source automation framework. The architecture is completely different from the existing test automation tools. Cypress injects commands directly into the browser hence it has full control over the browser. Both the web application and tests run under the same browser, so it has access to the internals of web applications.

Pros of Cypress

• Cypress is an open-source automation tool, no cost is involved for usage
• It also has a commercial version with dashboard features with a minimum license fee.  
• Cypress test execution IDE helps to pick and execute the test using the graphical interface
• It also supports CLI mode, helps to integrate with many CI/CD tools
• Auto waiting, trace generator, video capturing, and screenshots are major features of Cypress
• It supports multiple browsers
• It supports API, Integration, Component, and Functional testing

Cons of Cypress

• It doesn’t support parallel execution
• No support for iFrames and multiple windows
• Doesn’t support cross-origin domains
• HTML reporter is not built
• Reporting and analytics are not included in the free version
• Supports only JavaScript programming language
• Safari browser is not supported yet

Testcafe

Testcafe is one of the less explored tools. Testcafe is an open-source tool managed by Developer Express Inc and also Ghost Inspector Alternatives. It comes as both an open-source version and a commercial version. Testcafe is known for cleaner syntax, readability, and less configuration. It is capable of supporting both API and web functional testing out of the box.

Pros of Testcafe

• It has both open source version and a commercial version which is called TestCafe Studio
• No 3^rd party library dependencies
• Easy to install and very few configurations are required.
• It supports functional and API testing
• Supports many cloud providers like Browserstack and Lambdatest
• Tests can be executed using headed mode and headless mode via CLI
• Cleaner and more readable syntax. Requires fewer lines of code compared to other tools
• TestCafe Studio provides no code automation feature

Cons of Testcafe

• No code test automation is supported only in a commercial version
• Supports only JavaScript programming language
• Except for functional and API testing, it doesn’t support other types of testing such as accessibility testing, or visual testing.
• Testcafe cannot control the browser

Tricentis Tosca

Tricentis Tosca is a popular enterprise tool for test automation and a Ghost Inspector Alternatives. It supports intelligent test automation and uses the power of artificial intelligence(AI). As it is an enterprise-level software it is capable of many things including API testing, Mobile testing, parallel execution, etc.

Pros of Tosca

• Supports no code automation 
• Provides test management as an additional feature
• Supports mobile applications and web applications.
•  Functional testing, API testing, and accessibility testing can be done using the Tosca
• A rich dashboard helps to visualize the execution reports.
• Providing recording and playback capability makes automation easier
• It supports ToscaScript, Java, C#, Python, and VBScript languages

Cons of Tosca

• Tosca is a commercial tool and it is very expensive
• The learning curve is high in Tosca
• Community support is limited compared to open-source tools
• It consumes a lot of computer resources, hence you need to have a good configuration for Tosca automation

Ranorex

Ranorex was released in 2007, it is a commercial tool used by many large-scale organizations. It is built on the .Net platform and supports both web and desktop applications. Ranorex as a tool supports only the Windows platform.

Pros of Ranorex

• Rich IDE helps to automate the script easily
• It can automate Web, Desktop, and mobile  application
• Supports no code testing
• It supports cross-browser testing
• It has an  Image Tracking capability that can detect the change in GUI changes
• It provides a rich and comprehensive report.

Cons of Ranorex

• Paid license can add cost overhead to the company
• It only supports C# and VB.Net scripting languages
• Ranorex cannot be installed on macOS and Linux machines
• As it is a commercial tool, not much community support
• Irregular updates make users think twice. If there are any issues with existing versions that are blocking your test cases you may need to wait for a long time to fix them.

Reasons to Use Ghost Inspector

Ghost Inspector is comparatively new to the market, however it has a lot of features that help in automation. Below are some of the reasons to choose the Ghost Inspector.

• No code automation: Ghost Inspector is a codeless automation tool, hence anyone can automate. It reduces the cost of upskilling resources to organizations.
• Codeless test editor: It comes with a codeless test editor. You can adjust the locators and other parameters on the visual editor, which makes the tool more simple and easy.
• Integration with CI/CD pipeline: Tests created using Ghost Inspector can be integrated with many different DevOps tools such as Jenkins, CircleCI, etc.
• Alerts and integrations: It supports alerts and reports, you can integrate the alerts with Slack, MS Teams, and other popular messengers. It also provides integration with other tools such as Github, Gitlab, etc. via API calls.
• Supports visual testing: Visual Testing works by comparing the two images. It is very helpful in user interface testing as functional testing cannot cover the verification of styles, alignments, borders, and other aspects of the user interface. Visual testing can help in such scenarios.
• Cross-browser and responsive testing support: You can execute the tests on different browsers such as Chrome and Firefox for browser compatibility testing. It also supports responsive testing.
• Accessibility testing support: Ghost Inspector supports accessibility testing which helps to test the web application against the WCAG standards.

Limitations or Reasons to Go for Ghost Inspector Alternatives

Though Ghost Inspector is easy to use, it lacks a lot of features that the organization needs. Nowadays, the scope of automation is increased and organizations are expecting different testing types under one umbrella. The Ghost Inspector doesn’t support all different testing types. There are many major drawbacks and there comes the need for the best ghost inspector alternatives. Let’s understand them in detail.

• Cost: Ghost Inspector is not a free tool, you need to spend a lot on a license. It has many different packages to choose from. However, irrespective of the package, it adds cost overhead to the organization
• Limited browser support: It supports only Firefox and Chrome browsers. Many applications are designed to run on Mac and Windows. Tests cannot be executed against the Safari browser. 
• Doesn’t support native mobile app testing: You can test all different web applications, however, you cannot test the native mobile app using the Ghost Inspector.
• No support for API testing: It is a known fact that UI and functional testing take time to execute. The API testing can help us to quickly perform integration testing to build confidence. API testing also helps to validate the data. However, the Ghost Inspector lacks the API testing support
• Lack of reporter customization: It provides basic reporting, an organization may be required to filter out certain queries and send it as a report. However, Ghost Inspector doesn’t support the customization of reports.
• Difficult to debug failed tests: The tests are executed on a cloud, after execution you can see fewer logs but those logs are not enough to quickly debug the tests.

Why Do QA Analysts/Leaders Switch from Ghost Inspector to Testsigma?

There are many reasons why QA analysts/leaders might switch from Ghost Inspector to Testsigma:

• Features: Testsigma offers a wider range of features or functionalities that are more relevant to the QA team’s needs. For example, Testsigma supports mobile testing, API testing, and other specialized areas.
  
• Pricing: Testsigma is more cost-effective than Ghost Inspector, especially for larger teams or organizations.
  
• Ease of Use: Testsigma has a more user-friendly interface, i.e., less coding knowledge(NLP), making it easier for QA analysts to adopt.
  
• Integrations: Testsigma might integrate more seamlessly with other tools and platforms that the QA team already uses, such as project management tools, CI/CD pipelines, or bug-tracking systems.
  
• Scalability: Testsigma can scale better to accommodate the needs of a growing QA team or organization.

Conclusion

There are many Ghost Inspector Alternatives available in the market, some are commercial (paid) and others are open-source (free). Most of the open source tools require programming knowledge. But open-source tools may be budget-friendly. However, considering the many benefits of no code automation tools, most organizations are showing interest in no code automation tools. When it comes to no code automation tool, Testsigma captured a considerable market share. Importantly most of the testing needs can be implemented using Testsigma as it supports mobile, web, API, responsive, cross-browser, multiple operating systems, etc. Since all different testing needs can be covered using one tool, maintenance will be a lot easier. All these can be done without writing code. Testsigma provides rich and customizable reporting. Many organizations are actively adopting Testsigma, as they understand that it’s hard to find an alternative to Testsigma.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a Ghost Inspector and a Playwright?

There are many differences between Ghost Inspector and Playwright. Ghost Inspector is a cloud-based testing tool where Playwright requires installation on client machines. Playwright cannot support cloud-based testing by default without additional configuration but Ghost Inspector can do. Importantly, Ghost Inspector is a commercial tool involving cost to use. The playwright is completely open source and free to use.

Which is the best Ghost Inspector Alternative?

Considering the advantages and limitations of Ghost Inspector, there are many alternatives. However, the closest and the best alternative is Testsigma.

Can I bring existing Ghost Inspector tests over to Testsigma?

Testsigma simplifies the transition from other testing tools by allowing you to import existing test cases into your projects. You must contact support to confirm if you need to move your Ghost inspector tests.