Top 24 Open-Source Alternatives to Paparazzi (Cash App)

Introduction and Context

Paparazzi (Cash App) is an open-source screenshot testing tool for Android that runs UI screenshot tests on the JVM without relying on an emulator or physical device. Created by the Cash App team, Paparazzi leverages Android’s rendering (layoutlib) to capture component and screen-level snapshots quickly within Gradle builds. Written primarily in Kotlin and licensed under Apache-2.0, it fits naturally into modern Android development workflows, particularly for teams adopting Jetpack Compose or seeking faster feedback loops than traditional instrumentation tests.

Paparazzi gained popularity because it makes visual regression testing on Android fast and approachable. Developers can create “golden” screenshots, compare changes over time, and catch unintended UI regressions early—often right from their IDE or CI pipeline. Its strengths include speed, JVM-only execution, Kotlin-first ergonomics, straightforward Gradle integration, and a growing community within its niche.

However, as teams scale mobile test automation and broaden quality criteria, they often need complementary tools that go beyond visual diffs on Android. Some teams need cross-platform automation, richer debugging and reporting, accessibility or performance coverage, or different testing strategies (e.g., API, security, mutation testing). This is why many organizations evaluate alternatives or companion tools to Paparazzi—either to replace it in certain use cases or to round out their overall QA stack.

Overview: The Top 24 Open-Source Alternatives We’ll Cover

Here are the top 24 alternatives for Paparazzi (Cash App):

• Appium

• Citrus

• EarlGrey

• Espresso

• Gauge

• Geb

• JMeter

• Karate

• Lighthouse CI

• OWASP ZAP

• PIT (Pitest)

• Playwright

• Playwright Test

• Puppeteer

• Rest Assured

• Robot Framework + SeleniumLibrary

• Selenide

• Selenium

• Shot (Kakao)

• Spock

• Stryker

• Taiko

• TestNG

• xUnit.net

Why Look for Paparazzi Alternatives?

• Platform scope: Paparazzi focuses on Android UI screenshots. If you need iOS, web, or cross-platform end-to-end flows, you’ll need other tools.

• Test breadth: Screenshot testing is excellent for visual diffs, but it does not cover functional behavior, accessibility, performance, or security testing needs.

• Golden image management: Maintaining and reviewing many baseline images can be labor-intensive, especially with frequent UI changes or theming/locale variants.

• Real device fidelity: Running entirely on the JVM can miss device- or OS-specific issues (e.g., hardware acceleration, OEM variations, input methods).

• Reporting and debugging depth: While diffs are clear for visuals, teams may want trace viewers, network logs, video recordings, and richer analytics for complex failures.

• CI/CD integration patterns: Some organizations prefer a unified runner, cloud/device-farm compatibility, and standardized reporting across platforms and test types.

Detailed Breakdown of Alternatives

1. Appium

Appium is a cross-platform mobile automation framework for Android, iOS, and mobile web. Maintained by the open-source community, it uses the WebDriver protocol to drive apps and browsers. Its key differentiator is broad device and platform coverage, enabling teams to automate real device flows and hybrid apps with a single test codebase.

Strengths:

• Cross-platform (Android, iOS, mobile web) with one test strategy

• Mature ecosystem with extensive plugins, drivers, and cloud/device farm support

• Works with multiple languages and frameworks (Java, Python, JavaScript, etc.)

• CI/CD friendly; integrates with parallel execution and reporting tools

• Large community and abundant documentation

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Appium validates functional behavior on emulators/simulators and real devices; Paparazzi focuses on JVM-based Android screenshot tests.

• Better for end-to-end flows, interactions, and device-specific scenarios.

• Slower than Paparazzi for feedback on visual changes but far broader in scope.

2. Citrus

Citrus is a message-based integration testing framework for HTTP, WebSocket, JMS, and more. Built by the community around enterprise integration, it focuses on validating system-to-system communication, orchestration, and protocol-level behavior.

Strengths:

• Strong support for messaging and integration testing

• Declarative test design and reusable templates

• Useful for microservices and event-driven architectures

• Extensible with custom actions and validators

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Targets backend/message flows, not UI. It complements Paparazzi by covering integration layers.

• Ideal when visual diffs aren’t the goal but verifying service behavior is.

3. EarlGrey

EarlGrey is Google’s open-source UI testing framework for iOS. It provides synchronization features similar to Espresso for Android, ensuring stable UI interactions on iOS.

Strengths:

• Native iOS automation with robust synchronization

• Built and maintained by Google; integrates with Xcode workflows

• Fine-grained control for UI assertions and gestures

• Reliable for functional iOS UI tests

Compared to Paparazzi:

• iOS-only; focuses on interaction testing rather than screenshot diffs.

• A natural choice for teams mirroring Espresso-style tests on iOS.

4. Espresso

Espresso is Google’s official Android UI testing framework. It runs on devices and emulators, providing synchronized, reliable interaction tests.

Strengths:

• Native Android testing with first-class IDE/Gradle support

• Auto-synchronization reduces flakiness

• Strong assertions and matchers; works well with Compose and View-based apps

• Integrates with Android Test Orchestrator and device farms

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Espresso validates behavior on devices/emulators; Paparazzi captures fast visual diffs on the JVM.

• Use Espresso for end-to-end flows and real-device interactions; use Paparazzi for rapid visual regression checks.

5. Gauge

Gauge, from ThoughtWorks, is a specification-oriented test framework focused on readable, living documentation. It supports cross-language plugins and works well for UI and API testing.

Strengths:

• Human-readable specs with modular test design

• Multi-language support (Java, JavaScript, C#)

• Rich plugin ecosystem and reporting

• Good fit for BDD-like collaboration without heavy ceremony

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Gauge is a test framework for multiple layers; Paparazzi is specialized in Android screenshots.

• Consider Gauge to orchestrate broader E2E and API tests while keeping Paparazzi for visuals.

6. Geb

Geb is a Groovy-based web automation framework that combines the power of WebDriver with a concise DSL and the Spock test runner.

Strengths:

• Expressive Groovy DSL over Selenium WebDriver

• Strong page object modeling with concise syntax

• Integrates smoothly with Spock for readable specs

• Good for maintainable web UI suites

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web-focused; not for Android screenshots.

• Useful for teams with JVM stacks that want readable, maintainable web UI automation.

7. JMeter

Apache JMeter is a performance/load testing tool for web, APIs, and various protocols. It offers both GUI-based test creation and command-line execution for CI.

Strengths:

• Scalable load testing with distributed execution

• Broad protocol support (HTTP(S), JDBC, JMS, etc.)

• Integrates with monitoring/APM for performance analysis

• Mature ecosystem and community

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Targets performance and scalability rather than UI visuals.

• Complements Paparazzi by validating throughput, latency, and system resilience.

8. Karate

Karate is a unified test framework for API, HTTP, and UI (via Playwright/WebDriver), featuring a DSL that lowers the barrier to entry for test authors.

Strengths:

• Single DSL for API, data-driven tests, and UI automation

• Built-in HTTP client, JSON/XML assertions, and mocks

• Easy CI integration with parallel execution

• Strong reporting and minimal boilerplate

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Broader scope across API and UI; not focused on Android screenshots.

• Useful as a one-stop framework for service and web validation with optional UI layers.

9. Lighthouse CI

Lighthouse CI automates Lighthouse audits for performance, accessibility, SEO, and best practices in web apps.

Strengths:

• Automated audits with performance and accessibility metrics

• Baseline comparisons over time in CI

• Actionable insights for web quality gates

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web-centric and metrics-based vs. Android visual diffs.

• Ideal for teams that need performance and accessibility gates in web pipelines.

10. OWASP ZAP

OWASP ZAP is a dynamic application security testing (DAST) tool for web and APIs. It automates security scanning and is widely used in DevSecOps.

Strengths:

• Robust automated security scanning and spidering

• Active and passive scans to find common vulnerabilities

• CI-friendly and extendable with scripts and add-ons

• Backed by the OWASP community

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Focuses on security, not UI visuals.

• Complements Paparazzi by addressing a different dimension of quality: application security.

11. PIT (Pitest)

PIT is a mutation testing framework for JVM languages that evaluates the effectiveness of unit tests by introducing small changes (“mutations”) to code.

Strengths:

• Measures test suite quality beyond code coverage

• Integrates with popular JVM build tools

• Granular reports highlighting weak tests

• Encourages stronger unit test assertions

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Targets unit test robustness; unrelated to UI screenshots.

• Useful to improve code-level confidence alongside visual regression checks.

12. Playwright

Playwright, maintained by Microsoft, is a modern web automation framework supporting Chromium, Firefox, and WebKit with strong auto-waiting and tracing.

Strengths:

• Reliable cross-browser automation with auto-waits

• First-class tracing, network controls, and diagnostics

• Multi-language support (JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Java, .NET)

• Parallel execution and strong CI integration

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web-focused E2E instead of Android screenshots.

• Excellent for cross-browser UI testing; pairs with Paparazzi if your product spans Android and web.

13. Playwright Test

Playwright Test is the official test runner for Playwright, offering tight integration with traces, reporters, and test isolation.

Strengths:

• Built-in parallelism, retries, and fixtures

• Rich reporting with traces, screenshots, and videos

• Powerful test isolation and auto-waiting

• Zero-config setup for common web scenarios

Compared to Paparazzi:

• A test runner for web automation vs. a screenshot tool for Android.

• Ideal if you standardize on Playwright for web and need cohesive reporting.

14. Puppeteer

Puppeteer is a Node.js library for controlling Chromium-based browsers via the DevTools Protocol. It’s great for web automation, scraping, and headless testing.

Strengths:

• Direct Chrome/Chromium control with fine-grained APIs

• Fast headless execution and scriptable flows

• Good for visual checks, PDFs, and performance metrics via DevTools

• Strong for CI with simple setup

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web/Chromium automation rather than Android UI on JVM.

• Useful for web UIs and visual checks beyond mobile Android.

15. Rest Assured

Rest Assured is a Java DSL for testing RESTful APIs, making API assertions succinct and readable.

Strengths:

• Concise request/response DSL in Java

• JSON/XML parsing and schema validation

• Easy integration with build tools and CI

• Strong fit for backend contract and regression testing

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Focuses on API correctness, not UI visuals.

• Complements Paparazzi by ensuring backend reliability behind your mobile app.

16. Robot Framework + SeleniumLibrary

Robot Framework is a keyword-driven automation framework with a rich ecosystem; SeleniumLibrary enables web UI testing.

Strengths:

• Keyword-driven approach lowers the barrier for non-developers

• Extensive libraries and plugins beyond web (API, DB, files, etc.)

• Clear, readable test cases and reusable keywords

• Good reporting and CI integration

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web-centric (with SeleniumLibrary) and multi-domain; not Android screenshot-specific.

• Useful for cross-functional teams and acceptance testing at scale.

17. Selenide

Selenide is a Java framework that wraps Selenium WebDriver with concise APIs and automatic waits.

Strengths:

• Fluent, robust API with built-in waits

• Reduced boilerplate compared to raw Selenium

• Good failure diagnostics and page objects

• Strong fit for JVM-based web teams

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web automation vs. Android visual diffs.

• Great for reliable browser tests in Java/Kotlin stacks.

18. Selenium

Selenium is the de facto standard for browser automation, offering multi-language bindings and broad ecosystem support.

Strengths:

• Cross-browser coverage with a massive community

• Language-agnostic with bindings for popular languages

• Mature tooling, grid for scaling, and vendor/cloud support

• Integrates with nearly every CI/CD stack

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web-focused functional UI testing; not Android JVM screenshots.

• A cornerstone for web E2E; use alongside Paparazzi for full-stack coverage.

19. Shot (Kakao)

Shot is an Android screenshot testing library from Kakao. Like Paparazzi, it focuses on visual regression for Android UIs.

Strengths:

• Purpose-built for Android screenshot testing

• Supports golden image comparisons and CI workflows

• Kotlin-friendly with Gradle integration

• Community adoption in Android teams

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Most directly comparable alternative focusing on Android visuals.

• Teams may choose between Shot and Paparazzi based on API preferences, configuration models, and ecosystem fit.

20. Spock

Spock is a testing framework for the JVM that uses a BDD-like style with Groovy. It encourages readable, behavior-focused tests.

Strengths:

• Expressive specifications and data-driven testing

• Excellent mocking/stubbing support

• Clear separation of given/when/then phases

• Works well with JVM projects and build tools

Compared to Paparazzi:

• General-purpose unit/integration testing framework; not for Android screenshots.

• Complements Paparazzi by improving test readability and unit-level rigor.

21. Stryker

Stryker provides mutation testing across multiple ecosystems (Node.js, .NET, Scala), measuring test effectiveness.

Strengths:

• Language support across popular stacks

• Actionable mutation score to improve tests

• Plugins and reporters for CI visibility

• Encourages stronger assertions and coverage quality

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Focuses on test suite quality metrics rather than UI visuals.

• A strategic addition when you want measurable test robustness.

22. Taiko

Taiko, from ThoughtWorks, is a Node.js framework for browser automation with a focus on readable APIs and reliability.

Strengths:

• Human-friendly selectors (e.g., by text) and smart waits

• Minimal configuration, quick setup

• Works well in CI with headless Chromium

• Encourages maintainable web test suites

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Web automation vs. Android screenshot testing.

• Good choice for teams that value readable JavaScript-based E2E tests.

23. TestNG

TestNG is a testing framework for the JVM offering flexible annotations, data providers, and parallelism.

Strengths:

• Powerful test configuration, suites, and grouping

• Parallel execution and dependency management

• Broad ecosystem and reporting options

• Works across unit, integration, and functional tests

Compared to Paparazzi:

• General-purpose framework; not Android visualization-specific.

• Often used as the backbone for organizing and running broader test suites alongside UI tools.

24. xUnit.net

xUnit.net is a modern unit testing framework for .NET, designed with extensibility and parallelism in mind.

Strengths:

• Idiomatic for modern .NET development

• Extensible with custom attributes and fixtures

• Parallel test execution for speed

• Strong integration with .NET toolchain and CI

Compared to Paparazzi:

• Targets .NET unit/integration tests; unrelated to Android visuals.

• Fits teams building .NET services or applications adjacent to mobile clients.

Things to Consider Before Choosing a Paparazzi Alternative

• Scope and goals: Do you need visual diffs, functional E2E, API validation, performance, security, or some combination?

• Platform coverage: Android only, iOS, web, or cross-platform? Consider the mix your product supports today and in the future.

• Language and tech stack: Align tools with your team’s primary languages (Kotlin/Java, JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, .NET).

• Ease of setup and maintenance: Favor tools with clear docs, sensible defaults, and manageable configuration for your team.

• Execution speed: JVM-based and headless runners are fast; device-based tests provide fidelity but may be slower.

• CI/CD integration: Look for CLI-first tools with parallelism, retries, artifacts (screenshots, videos, traces), and clean exit codes.

• Debugging and observability: Prefer tools offering rich logs, traces, screenshots, videos, network capture, and actionable error messages.

• Community and ecosystem: Active communities, plugins, and samples reduce long-term friction.

• Scalability: Consider how tests will shard, parallelize, and run on device clouds or grids as your suite grows.

• Cost and licensing: All options here are open-source (Apache-2.0), but factor in infrastructure, maintenance, and potential device/cloud expenses.

Conclusion

Paparazzi (Cash App) remains a fast, Kotlin-first solution for Android screenshot testing. It excels at catching visual regressions early without emulators or devices, making it a favorite for teams that iterate quickly on UI.

Still, modern QA rarely hinges on a single tool. Many organizations layer complementary capabilities:

• For interactive Android flows, Espresso and Appium provide device-level confidence.

• For iOS and web, EarlGrey, Selenium, Playwright, Puppeteer, and Taiko extend coverage.

• For API, performance, security, and test quality, tools like Rest Assured, JMeter, OWASP ZAP, PIT, and Stryker fill critical gaps.

• For Android screenshot testing specifically, Shot (Kakao) is a close peer to evaluate alongside Paparazzi.

A balanced approach is to keep Paparazzi for rapid Android visual diffs and introduce other tools where they shine—cross-platform E2E, backend validation, performance, or security. If scaling device coverage is a priority, consider adopting emulator/device farms or hosted device clouds to standardize execution across platforms. With the right mix, you can maintain fast feedback loops, broader risk coverage, and higher confidence in every release.