Top 1 Alternatives to Shot (Kakao) for Screenshot Testing

Introduction and Context

Android teams have long relied on automated UI testing to catch visual regressions early and keep apps looking sharp across devices. As UI layers grew more intricate—moving from classic View hierarchies to Compose—screenshot testing became a practical complement to functional tests. It offers a simple contract: render the UI, capture an image, and compare it against a known-good baseline. If pixels change unexpectedly, the test fails, prompting a review.

Shot (Kakao) sits squarely in this space. It is an open-source (Apache-2.0), Kotlin-first screenshot testing tool for Android. Teams reach for it to automate visual checks in CI, standardize how baselines are recorded and verified, and introduce a repeatable workflow for comparing UI changes over time. In many setups, Shot (Kakao) integrates with Gradle tasks, provides a consistent golden-image workflow, and supports diffing, making it a good fit for teams who want a “batteries-included” approach to visual regression on Android.

Why did Shot (Kakao) become popular?

• It solves a focused problem—Android screenshot testing—well.

• It’s open source with permissive licensing, easing adoption in both startups and enterprises.

• It integrates into existing Android build and test pipelines using Kotlin and Gradle.

• It helps automate what would otherwise be manual, error-prone visual checks.

As Android development evolved—especially with growth in Jetpack Compose, heavier CI pipelines, and the push for faster PR feedback—teams started exploring alternatives that address specific pain points: emulator complexity, execution speed, and hermetic test runs. That’s where modern alternatives step in, including options that eliminate emulators entirely.

This article reviews one of the most prominent alternatives and helps you decide whether it fits your use case better than Shot (Kakao).

Overview

Here are the top 1 alternatives for Shot (Kakao):

• Paparazzi (Cash App)

Why Look for Shot (Kakao) Alternatives?

While Shot (Kakao) is widely used and capable, teams often encounter scenarios where another approach is a better fit. Common reasons to seek alternatives include:

• Emulator or device dependency: If your test setup depends on emulators or real devices, CI can become slower and flakier due to boot times, hardware acceleration issues, or environment drift.

• Performance and feedback speed: Visual test suites can be heavy; developers want rapid iteration and near-instant CI feedback. Reducing setup overhead and execution time becomes critical at scale.

• Determinism and flakiness: Rendering differences across machines, OS versions, or GPU drivers can cause false positives. Some teams seek hermetic tests that run the same way everywhere.

• Modern UI frameworks: As teams adopt Compose, they prefer tools that natively support it and match Compose’s developer ergonomics without extra scaffolding.

• Simpler CI/CD integration: Heavyweight infrastructure (emulators, system services) complicates pipelines. Lightweight, JVM-hosted solutions appeal to teams optimizing for simplicity and maintainability.

If any of these resonate, an alternative might offer a better developer experience or operational efficiency.

Alternative: Paparazzi (Cash App)

What it is and who built it

Paparazzi is an open-source (Apache-2.0) screenshot testing tool for Android created by the Cash App team. It is Kotlin-friendly and focuses on running UI screenshot tests without an emulator or real device. Instead, it renders Android layouts (both Views and Compose) on the JVM, enabling fast, consistent, and hermetic test runs.

What makes Paparazzi distinct is its approach to rendering: by skipping the emulator, it drastically cuts setup time and reduces the variability that often plagues device-based screenshot tests. This makes it attractive for teams seeking speed and stability in CI and local development.

Core strengths

• No emulator or device required: Tests run on the JVM, removing the overhead of device boot, ADB interactions, and GPU variance. This typically translates to faster builds and less CI complexity.

• Speed and determinism: JVM-based rendering yields short feedback loops and more predictable results. Tests often run faster and fail less due to environmental differences.

• Compose and Views support: Works well with modern UI stacks like Jetpack Compose while also supporting classic View-based UIs, easing adoption for mixed codebases.

• CI-friendly and scalable: Because it avoids emulators, parallelization is simpler, caches are easier to manage, and resource usage is lower—helpful for large organizations running many tests per PR.

• Baseline and diff workflows: Similar to Shot, Paparazzi supports recording and verifying images, producing diffs when changes occur, and integrating into a “golden images” review process.

• Kotlin-first and Gradle-centric: Easy to adopt in Kotlin-heavy projects; the setup blends naturally into a typical Android Gradle build.

• Qualifiers and theming: Supports resource qualifiers (e.g., locale, font scale, night mode) so you can verify variations in a controlled, repeatable manner.

• Low friction for PR reviewers: Automated diffs explain visual changes clearly, helping reviewers focus on intent rather than guesswork.

Where it differs from Shot (Kakao)

Both Shot (Kakao) and Paparazzi target the same problem—visual regression testing for Android UIs—yet they approach execution differently:

• Execution environment:

• Developer ergonomics:

• Compose affinity:

• Integration model:

In practice, teams with large, fast-moving codebases and strong Compose adoption often favor Paparazzi for its speed and hermetic tests. Teams that need high confidence in how UI renders on real or emulated devices may prefer staying with Shot (Kakao) or running both: Paparazzi for fast checks in PRs, and device-based screenshots for final validation.

Potential drawbacks

• Device fidelity gaps: Since Paparazzi renders on the JVM, it won’t always mirror exact device GPU behavior, OEM modifications, or hardware-accelerated subtleties. If you must validate precise, device-specific rendering, a device-based tool may still be required.

• Limited coverage for system services: UI that depends on certain system APIs or services may be harder to simulate. Although most app-level UI is testable, tests that rely on complex system integrations may require workarounds.

• Animations and dynamic content: Snapshot tests generally require stable, deterministic UI states. Handling animations, dynamic timestamps, or network content needs extra stubbing or disabling—true for most screenshot tools, but worth calling out.

• Learning curve for migration: If your team is invested in a Shot (Kakao) workflow with established baselines, switching will require re-recording images and updating CI steps. The payoff is usually speed and stability, but it’s still a project.

Best-fit scenarios

• Fast PR feedback on UI changes: If long emulator boot times and flakiness slow your pipeline, Paparazzi’s JVM mode can shrink cycle times dramatically.

• Compose-heavy apps: For teams embracing Compose, Paparazzi harmonizes with existing developer workflows and previews, offering quick, hermetic snapshot tests.

• Large organizations and monorepos: When scale matters—many modules, thousands of tests—reducing infrastructure friction is a big win. Paparazzi tends to be easier to parallelize and cache.

• Design-system and component libraries: Component snapshots benefit from Paparazzi’s determinism; teams can validate style tokens, typography, and color across light/dark themes and locales quickly and repeatedly.

A direct comparison to Shot (Kakao)

• Speed:

• Stability:

• Realism:

• Setup and CI:

• Ecosystem:

In short, Paparazzi is compelling if you want speed and determinism; Shot (Kakao) remains strong when you need greater device realism and are comfortable managing emulators in CI.

Things to Consider Before Choosing a Shot (Kakao) Alternative

Before you switch tools, evaluate the following to choose well and avoid rework:

• Project scope and UI architecture:

• Accuracy vs. speed trade-off:

• Ease of setup and maintenance:

• Execution speed and feedback loop:

• CI/CD integration:

• Debugging tools and diff quality:

• Baseline governance:

• Flakiness management:

• Platform and device coverage:

• Community and support:

• Scalability:

• Cost and build minutes:

• Test authoring experience:

• Migration effort:

• Security and compliance:

Conclusion

Shot (Kakao) remains a capable, open-source screenshot testing tool for Android, and many teams continue to rely on it for consistent visual checks. It’s especially suitable when you need to validate UI as it appears on actual emulators or devices and you’re comfortable managing that infrastructure.

However, as UI stacks modernize and teams push for faster feedback and more deterministic tests, Paparazzi (Cash App) offers a compelling alternative. By running on the JVM without an emulator, Paparazzi often reduces flakiness, accelerates CI, and aligns well with Compose-first development. It is an excellent fit for teams that:

• Want rapid, hermetic feedback during PRs.

• Maintain large codebases and need scalable, low-maintenance test infrastructure.

• Are building component libraries or design systems where deterministic snapshots are vital.

• Have already standardized on Kotlin and Gradle and value developer ergonomics.

A balanced approach can also work well. Some teams combine the two strategies:

• Use Paparazzi for fast, stable UI snapshot tests on every PR.

• Reserve device- or emulator-based screenshots for end-to-end validation and pre-release checks where hardware fidelity matters.

Ultimately, the “best” tool is the one that fits your team’s priorities and constraints. If speed, determinism, and CI simplicity are top of mind, Paparazzi is likely the top alternative to evaluate. If your priority is validating exact device rendering and you have stable emulator infrastructure, Shot (Kakao) remains a strong choice.