Top 4 Alternatives to Eggplant Test for SenseTalk Testing

Introduction and Context

Eggplant Test has a long, distinctive history in the functional test automation space. Originally rooted in technologies developed by Redstone Software and later commercialized by TestPlant (now part of Keysight Technologies), Eggplant carved out a niche by combining model-based testing with computer vision and image recognition. Rather than relying purely on DOM or object hooks, it interacts with applications visually, much like a human tester would. This design enabled teams to test across desktop, web, and mobile experiences—even when traditional object locators were unreliable or unavailable.

Several components made Eggplant popular:

• SenseTalk, a readable, English-like scripting language, made test creation approachable for non-developers.

• Image-based automation and OCR allowed UI-level validation across platforms and technologies, including remote and virtualized environments.

• Model-based test design encouraged reusable flows and higher-level thinking about user journeys.

• Commercial support and integrations helped organizations embed Eggplant in enterprise pipelines.

Over time, Eggplant Test gained traction among organizations that needed full-stack UI testing beyond web-only automation, especially in environments where visual fidelity and cross-platform coverage were critical. However, as software delivery moved toward cloud-native stacks, containerized CI/CD, and developer-centric tooling, some teams began seeking alternatives that align with today’s workflows. These teams often want tools that are easier to scale in the cloud, are more deeply integrated with modern CI/CD systems, or reduce the need for specialized language skills like SenseTalk. That shift has led many to evaluate other options—particularly low-code/no-code or JavaScript-based solutions that focus on web or mobile-first testing.

Overview: The Top 4 Alternatives to Cover

Here are the top 4 alternatives to Eggplant Test:

• Mabl

• Repeato

• TestCafe Studio

• Waldo

Each of these tools takes a different approach—ranging from web-first low-code testing to mobile-focused, computer vision–assisted workflows—giving teams practical routes away from SenseTalk while preserving powerful end-to-end testing capabilities.

Why Look for Eggplant Test Alternatives?

• Specialized language (SenseTalk): While readable, SenseTalk is not a mainstream programming language. Hiring, onboarding, and cross-skilling can be more difficult than with widely adopted languages or codeless tools.

• Cost and licensing complexity: As a commercial enterprise product, licensing and scaling can become a consideration, especially for teams expanding test coverage rapidly or adding large device/browser matrices.

• Cloud-first scaling and parallelization: Some teams prefer SaaS-first tools with built-in, elastic test infrastructure that scales parallel runs without significant configuration or maintenance.

• Web DOM-level capabilities: Image-based testing is powerful but can be overkill for modern web apps where DOM selectors, network stubbing, and API-layer validation accelerate test speed and stability.

• Integration overhead: Enterprises may find they need to integrate Eggplant with other tools for reporting, analytics, or device/browser grids, adding to maintenance and operational complexity.

These factors do not diminish Eggplant’s strengths; they simply reflect evolving preferences in how teams assemble their QA stacks.

Alternative 1: Mabl

What it is and who built it

Mabl is a commercial, low-code end-to-end testing platform focused on web and API testing. Built by mabl, Inc., it is a SaaS-first solution that emphasizes ease of authoring, auto-healing, and integrated analytics. Mabl aims to help teams create and maintain resilient UI tests with minimal code, while still providing configuration for power users.

What makes it different: Mabl is built for the cloud from the ground up. It combines low-code creation with visual change detection, cross-browser runs, and API testing in a single, managed platform.

Standout capabilities

• Low-code authoring with self-healing: Create tests quickly and reduce maintenance through element-learning and auto-healing based on application changes.

• Cross-browser, parallel cloud execution: Scale test suites across common browsers without managing infrastructure.

• Web and API testing in one tool: Validate end-to-end flows that span UI and API layers.

• Built-in visual change detection: Catch unintended style or layout shifts alongside functional checks.

• CI/CD integrations and reporting: Plug into pipelines and dashboards for continuous quality feedback.

How it compares to Eggplant Test

• Platform focus: Mabl is optimized for web and API testing, whereas Eggplant Test spans desktop, web, and mobile with strong visual automation. If you primarily test web apps, Mabl’s web-first approach can be simpler and faster.

• Technology model: Mabl leans on DOM-aware automation and low-code creation. Eggplant’s computer vision excels when object locators are unreliable or when testing remote UIs visually.

• Language and skills: Mabl reduces reliance on a specialized language like SenseTalk. Teams without SenseTalk expertise may ramp faster.

• Cloud scalability: Mabl’s SaaS-first design often simplifies parallelization and scaling compared to managing infrastructure or additional integrations for large-scale runs.

Ideal use cases

• Web-heavy teams that want low-code authoring and fast feedback in CI/CD.

• Organizations aiming to consolidate UI and API testing in one platform.

• Teams seeking built-in visual checks without adopting full image-based testing for everything.

Potential trade-offs

• Less suitable for deep desktop automation or pixel-precise, image-driven use cases where Eggplant excels.

• As with any low-code tool, test design and structure still matter; poorly designed tests can become flaky over time.

Alternative 2: Repeato

What it is and who built it

Repeato is a commercial, codeless test automation tool for iOS and Android. Developed by Repeato, it emphasizes computer vision and resilient UI recognition to maintain stable mobile tests even as app UIs evolve.

What makes it different: Repeato focuses on mobile UI testing with computer vision at its core. This aligns conceptually with Eggplant’s visual approach but narrows the scope to mobile, which can result in a more streamlined experience for mobile-focused teams.

Standout capabilities

• Computer vision for mobile UI: Robust recognition reduces brittleness from minor UI changes and device differences.

• Codeless authoring: Test creation by recording and interacting with the app, suited for teams without heavy coding expertise.

• Cross-device coverage: Designed for iOS and Android testing, with options to run on local devices or device labs.

• CI/CD compatibility: Integrates with common pipelines to run tests automatically on push or release events.

• Resilient to UI changes: ML-assisted matching improves maintainability across app iterations.

How it compares to Eggplant Test

• Platform focus: Repeato is dedicated to mobile; Eggplant covers desktop, web, and mobile. If your needs are exclusively mobile, Repeato’s specialization can mean less tooling overhead.

• Technology model: Both leverage computer vision, but Repeato applies it specifically to native mobile testing, simplifying setup and maintenance for mobile teams.

• Language and skills: Repeato’s codeless approach removes the need for SenseTalk skills or heavy scripting.

• Scope and extensibility: Eggplant’s model-based testing and broader platform support may better serve multi-surface enterprise apps that include thick clients and remote desktops.

Ideal use cases

• Mobile-first organizations that need resilient, device-agnostic tests.

• Teams migrating from visual testing in Eggplant to a purpose-built mobile solution.

• QA groups that want codeless authoring without wiring together multiple tools.

Potential trade-offs

• Not intended for desktop testing or web DOM-level automation.

• Visual/mobile specialization may require separate tooling for API, performance, or advanced network mocking.

Alternative 3: TestCafe Studio

What it is and who built it

TestCafe Studio is a commercial, codeless IDE from DevExpress based on the open-source TestCafe engine. It targets end-to-end web UI testing and offers a recorder, visual test authoring, and script editing to balance ease of use with flexibility.

What makes it different: TestCafe Studio avoids WebDriver/Selenium, running tests directly in the browser with built-in waits and stability features. It is JavaScript/TypeScript-friendly for teams that want code-level control, yet still provides codeless workflows.

Standout capabilities

• Codeless recorder with script access: Start with recordings, then refine using JavaScript or TypeScript for maintainability.

• No WebDriver dependency: Built-in smart waits and browser control can reduce flakiness caused by synchronization issues.

• Cross-browser support and parallel runs: Execute tests across Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and headless variants with concurrency.

• Robust developer workflow: Assertions, selectors, network request mocking, screenshots, and videos for debugging.

• CI/CD ready: Simple integration into pipelines with command-line execution and reporting.

How it compares to Eggplant Test

• Platform focus: TestCafe Studio is purely web-focused, whereas Eggplant spans desktop, web, and mobile using image recognition.

• Technology model: TestCafe Studio leans on DOM-based testing with strong selectors and built-in waits; Eggplant excels when UIs are not easily accessible via DOM (e.g., remote desktops or custom-rendered components).

• Language and skills: TestCafe Studio aligns with JavaScript/TypeScript—a major advantage for dev-centric teams and easier hiring than SenseTalk-specific roles.

• Visual vs. DOM trade-off: If you depend on pixel-perfect, image-based workflows, Eggplant remains strong. If you want fast, scriptable web testing, TestCafe Studio may be more straightforward.

Ideal use cases

• Web application teams comfortable with JavaScript/TypeScript who want codeless-to-code flexibility.

• CI/CD-driven engineering organizations seeking fast, maintainable, and parallelizable web tests.

• QA groups aiming to reduce flakiness from timing issues without building their own synchronization logic.

Potential trade-offs

• Not suitable for desktop automation or mobile app testing.

• Teams heavily invested in visual verification might need supplementary visual tools.

Alternative 4: Waldo

What it is and who built it

Waldo is a commercial, no-code mobile testing platform for iOS and Android. Built by Waldo, it focuses on rapid test creation via recording and playback, with cloud-based device execution and minimal scripting.

What makes it different: Waldo streamlines mobile UI testing for product and QA teams with a recorder-first approach and cloud infrastructure, enabling quick setup and scale without local device management.

Standout capabilities

• No-code recording for mobile apps: Create tests by navigating through the app; no specialized scripting required.

• Cloud-based device runs: Execute across a managed device farm for coverage without maintaining hardware.

• Parallelization and scheduling: Scale runs automatically to fit release cadences and CI/CD triggers.

• Flake reduction features: Auto-waits and stabilization under typical mobile conditions.

• Team-friendly collaboration: Organized runs, histories, and notifications to keep stakeholders aligned.

How it compares to Eggplant Test

• Platform focus: Waldo focuses on mobile, while Eggplant also supports desktop and web through image-based automation.

• Technology model: Waldo emphasizes no-code recording on real devices; Eggplant’s image recognition offers broader applicability but with more complex setup for multi-surface testing.

• Skills and onboarding: Waldo removes the need for SenseTalk or code-heavy test design, accelerating onboarding for mixed-skill teams.

• Infrastructure: Waldo’s hosted device cloud reduces operational overhead compared to maintaining on-prem infrastructure or third-party device labs.

Ideal use cases

• Mobile product teams that want to move fast with minimal scripting.

• Organizations transitioning from visual, cross-platform testing to focused mobile coverage.

• QA groups scaling regression coverage across device OS versions and screen sizes without maintaining labs.

Potential trade-offs

• Not designed for desktop automation or web DOM testing.

• Deep customization, advanced network stubbing, or API-level testing may require complementary tools.

Things to Consider Before Choosing an Eggplant Test Alternative

Selecting the right replacement (or complement) to Eggplant Test depends on your technical landscape, staffing, and goals. Consider the following:

• Application surface and scope:

• Language and skill alignment:

• Ease of setup and maintenance:

• Execution speed and stability:

• CI/CD integration:

• Debugging and observability:

• Cross-browser/device coverage:

• Scalability and cost:

• Ecosystem and community:

• Long-term maintainability:

Conclusion

Eggplant Test remains a powerful option—particularly when you need visual, model-based automation across desktop, web, and mobile, or when UI surfaces don’t expose reliable object models. Its SenseTalk-driven approach and image recognition have earned it a loyal following in complex enterprise environments where human-like interaction is essential.

That said, many teams are modernizing their stacks toward cloud-first, developer-friendly workflows and tighter CI/CD loops. In that context:

• Mabl shines for web and API testing with low-code authoring, self-healing, and SaaS-first scalability.

• Repeato offers a mobile-first, computer vision approach that’s resilient and codeless for iOS and Android.

• TestCafe Studio provides a pragmatic bridge between codeless recording and JavaScript/TypeScript scripting for web apps, without WebDriver complexity.

• Waldo accelerates mobile UI testing through no-code recording and cloud device execution, minimizing infrastructure overhead.

If your pipeline is web-centric and you want rapid feedback, Mabl or TestCafe Studio can streamline DOM-level automation. For teams focused on mobile, Repeato and Waldo provide purpose-built paths away from SenseTalk while retaining the benefits of visual or recorder-driven workflows. You can also pair these tools with a device or browser cloud, or integrate them into CI/CD with systems like Jenkins, GitHub Actions, or GitLab CI for continuous coverage.

Ultimately, the “best” alternative depends on your app surfaces, team skills, and operational model. Start by piloting one web-focused and one mobile-focused option against a representative slice of your regression suite. Measure setup time, stability, run speed, and maintenance effort. With clear evaluation criteria, you can choose an Eggplant Test alternative that preserves the strengths you rely on while better aligning with your current engineering practices.