We performed a comparison between Catchpoint and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Nexthink, Lakeside Software, Riverbed and others in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM)."The solution offers three different ways of slicing data to look for abnormalities."
"Catchpoint provides a great amount of information."
"The most valuable features of Catchpoint are basically the transaction monitors on the API and UI."
"The best feature in Catchpoint is the alert or the notification my company gets frequently, in particular, every five minutes. It's the notification you get whenever a respective market has an issue. There's also a dashboard in Catchpoint that shows the markets you support, so all the markets will be highlighted graphically in the dashboard whenever there's downtime that could affect you. If there's no issue for a specific market, it will be in green, so in this way, anybody would be able to understand which market has issues and which market has no issues through Catchpoint. The tool is very useful for monitoring activities."
"Catchpoint helped us establish that something is in a provider network, so we could tell our customers to check their internet provider because the traffic is not getting to us. You need to be gentle when you tell them that, but the fact that we could do it was crucial."
"Catchpoint is very flexible and also provides logs for troubleshooting purposes. It helps us fix issues within the SLAs signed with the end users. The tool is easy to learn."
"The drill-down feature of this product was very good. It allowed us to identify the exact page or area of the site that was causing our customers an issue."
"The thing I like most is the tech support in this company, because they have 24/7 chat support. We can chat immediately and ask them about an issue and they keep responding. They create tickets on our behalf and respond."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"Selenium web driver - Java."
"We would like the script creation feature of this solution to be improved, as it currently requires a complicated manual process to update the scripts."
"The old user version was better, it was more user-friendly."
"There are essentially a lot of quotas. Nobody wants to sit and manually create monitors for someone who uses synthetic monitoring."
"Catchpoint can be improved by focusing solely on network monitoring."
"A large selection of nodes are available but it is a challenge to test reliably in China and the Middle East."
"It would be great if Catchpoint could incorporate its alerting system instead of relying on separate tools like ServiceNow."
"There's still too much manual involvement in getting customized test configurations out there. It's good, but it still takes a lot of effort. In other words, it's when you need to configure it to collect a specific variable and that kind of thing."
"if we need to do performance analysis, we have to click too many times. For example, if there is an issue that is caught by Catchpoint, we need to understand what the error is and at which step it failed, or which transaction that is impacted. To drill down, we have to click too many things to get the answer."
"Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
Catchpoint is ranked 5th in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) with 12 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Catchpoint is rated 8.2, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Catchpoint writes "The UI is well designed, so it's easy to get the visibility you want". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Catchpoint is most compared with Dynatrace, ThousandEyes, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
