Top 6 Alternatives to Applitools for Mobile for SDK Testing

Introduction and Context

Visual testing has steadily evolved alongside the broader test automation ecosystem. In the early days, teams validated functionality primarily through scripting tools like Selenium for the web and its mobile counterparts (Appium, Espresso, and XCUITest). As mobile apps matured, however, issues that weren’t strictly “functional” began hurting user experience—misaligned elements, broken layouts on specific devices, or unreadable text under certain themes. That gap is what visual testing set out to solve.

Applitools pioneered AI-powered visual testing with its Eyes platform, and Applitools for Mobile extends that capability to native iOS and Android interfaces. It combines SDK-based integrations with Visual AI to compare current screenshots against stored baselines, detecting pixel-level and perceptual differences. In practice, this helps QA and front-end teams catch layout shifts, styling regressions, and unintended UI changes earlier in the pipeline. Its strengths include:

• Rapid detection of visual regressions across app versions and devices

• Intuitive visual diffs for quick triage of UI issues

• SDKs for popular languages and frameworks, and integrations with CI pipelines

As adoption grew, organizations appreciated how Applitools for Mobile made it easier to “see” regressions that traditional assertions miss. Teams integrated it into Appium test suites or used it alongside native test frameworks to extend coverage from pure functional checks to visual correctness.

That said, some teams are now exploring alternatives. Common drivers include the overhead of managing visual baselines, handling dynamic or highly personalized UI states (which can produce false positives), cost considerations, and the desire for different workflows (e.g., codeless/cloud-first, bundled E2E capabilities including API checks, or specific SDK preferences). If you’re evaluating your strategy for SDK-driven mobile testing, the tools below offer compelling paths depending on your priorities.

Overview: Top 6 Alternatives Covered

Here are the top 6 alternatives to Applitools for Mobile for SDK testing:

• Applitools Eyes

• Mabl

• Percy

• Repeato

• TestCafe Studio

• Waldo

Each of these tools approaches visual or UI validation differently—some prioritize AI-based visual diffs, others emphasize codeless authoring or broader E2E coverage. The best fit depends on your app type (native vs. web), your team’s skill set, and your tolerance for baseline maintenance.

Why Look for Applitools for Mobile Alternatives?

• Baseline management overhead: Maintaining and reviewing baselines—especially across multiple devices, themes, and locales—can add operational burden as your app and test matrix grow.

• Dynamic UI false positives: Highly personalized screens, animations, or frequently changing content can cause noise in visual diffs and require careful region configuration or ignore rules.

• Cost and licensing: Commercial licensing may be a constraint for smaller teams or for organizations seeking a combined E2E solution (visual + functional + API) under one subscription.

• Workflow preferences: Some teams want codeless tools to empower non-coders; others prefer a single SDK-based approach closely integrated with Appium, Espresso, or XCUITest.

• Scope misalignment: If your testing mix extends beyond native mobile to include significant web or API testing, you may prefer a platform designed to cover web, API, and mobile in one place.

Detailed Breakdown of Alternatives

1) Applitools Eyes

Applitools Eyes is the broader visual testing platform from Applitools that supports web, mobile, and desktop applications. It brings AI-powered visual comparisons and scalable execution infrastructure to teams using SDKs in JavaScript, Java, Python, .NET, and more. Eyes is built by Applitools, the same vendor behind Applitools for Mobile.

What makes it different

• Cross-platform reach: Eyes provides a single Visual AI engine for web, mobile, and desktop apps, which can simplify standardization across multiple app types.

• Ultrafast visual grid: The platform includes an execution grid designed to scale visual checks across browsers, devices, and viewports quickly.

• Rich SDK ecosystem: Mature SDKs and integrations with common test frameworks and CI/CD systems.

Core strengths

• AI-powered visual diffs that detect layout and content anomalies more robustly than pixel-level comparisons.

• Mature dashboards for baseline review, approval flows, and test result triage.

• Broad language and framework support, making it easy to adopt within existing test suites.

• Scalable execution with parallelization and grid support for rapid feedback.

• Fine-grained control for dynamic regions, ignore areas, and match levels.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• Applitools for Mobile is part of the Eyes ecosystem. If you’re already invested in mobile testing, moving to the full Eyes platform may broaden your capabilities across web and desktop without changing your visual AI approach.

• Visual baseline considerations and potential false positives on dynamic UIs still apply. The same best practices—region ignores, layout match levels, and deterministic test data—are important.

Best for

• Teams standardizing visual testing across multiple platforms with one vendor and one Visual AI approach, while retaining SDK-driven workflows.

2) Mabl

Mabl is a commercial, low-code end-to-end testing platform that focuses primarily on web and API testing. Built by mabl, it offers a SaaS-first experience with self-healing tests, visual change detection, and strong CI/CD integration. While it does not target native iOS/Android apps in the same way Applitools for Mobile does, it can be a strong choice for teams whose mobile testing centers on mobile web.

What makes it different

• Emphasis on low-code authoring and self-healing to reduce maintenance for web automation.

• Combined E2E approach spanning functional validation, API testing, and visual change detection.

• SaaS-first, with built-in reporting and pipeline integrations.

Core strengths

• Low-code flows allow non-technical stakeholders to contribute to test creation and maintenance.

• Built-in visual change capture for web pages complements functional checks.

• Self-healing element selectors reduce test brittleness over time.

• Native integrations with CI tools and popular workflows for rapid feedback loops.

• Centralized analytics and reporting to track stability and quality trends.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• If you need native iOS/Android SDK-based visual validation, Mabl is not a direct substitute. However, for organizations whose mobile presence is predominantly mobile web, Mabl’s combination of visual change detection and functional testing can streamline your stack.

• Visual baselines in Mabl are generally simpler but less AI-centric than Applitools’ approach, which may reduce complexity but also reduce sensitivity to certain layout issues.

Best for

• Teams that prioritize low-code web and API automation, want visual checks as part of a broader E2E strategy, and don’t require native mobile SDK coverage.

3) Percy

Percy is a commercial visual testing solution known for snapshot-based visual diffs, strong CI integration, and developer-friendly workflows. Now part of BrowserStack, Percy primarily targets web applications. While Percy can be used to validate responsive layouts and mobile web breakpoints, it is not positioned as a native iOS/Android SDK solution.

What makes it different

• Snapshot-centric approach that integrates easily with web test runners and CI pipelines.

• Developer-first ergonomics with simple setup for visual diffs in pull requests.

• Tight integration with web workflows, enabling visual regression checks early in development.

Core strengths

• Easy onboarding and integration with existing web build pipelines.

• Clear, image-based diffs that make visual regressions obvious for reviewers.

• Support for multiple projects and environments within a single dashboard.

• Works well with component-driven development by snapshotting at the component or page level.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• Percy is primarily web-focused. If your goal is native mobile SDK testing (e.g., visual checks inside Appium/Espresso/XCUITest on iOS/Android), Percy is not a like-for-like alternative.

• For teams wanting consistent visual checks across web apps and responsive states, Percy can be a simpler option with less baseline management complexity than full Visual AI solutions.

Best for

• Front-end and QA teams focused on web UIs that want fast, reliable, snapshot-based visual testing integrated into CI.

4) Repeato

Repeato is a commercial, codeless mobile UI testing tool for iOS and Android. Built by Repeato, it uses computer vision (CV) techniques to drive and validate mobile apps, making it resilient to certain types of UI changes that can break selector-based tests. Its visual approach aligns closely with the needs of native mobile UI validation.

What makes it different

• Codeless interface that leverages computer vision to find and interact with on-screen elements.

• Mobile-first focus on native iOS and Android apps, reducing the need for code-heavy setup.

• Visual resilience that avoids brittle reliance on accessibility IDs or XPath.

Core strengths

• Quick authoring for non-coding testers through a point-and-click workflow.

• CV-based element recognition often handles minor UI changes better than strict selectors.

• Good fit for UI-heavy apps where visual layout and element identity are central to correctness.

• Integrates with CI/CD to run tests in pipelines and share results.

• Reduces maintenance overhead for teams without deep automation expertise.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• Both target native mobile UI quality, but they differ in approach: Applitools emphasizes visual diffing against baselines, while Repeato leans on CV-driven interaction and validation without always requiring explicit baselines.

• If your biggest pain is baseline upkeep and false positives with dynamic screens, Repeato’s CV-based model may feel lighter-weight. Conversely, Applitools’ Visual AI can be more precise for subtle visual regressions when tuned correctly.

Best for

• Teams that want codeless, mobile-first UI validation with computer vision and prefer less baseline management than AI diffing engines typically require.

5) TestCafe Studio

TestCafe Studio is a commercial, codeless IDE version of TestCafe for web UI testing. Developed by DevExpress, it emphasizes an approachable recording and editing experience for end-to-end web tests. While not a native mobile solution, it can target mobile web through responsive testing.

What makes it different

• Codeless IDE for authoring and running TestCafe tests without browser plugins or WebDriver.

• Stable automation approach that reduces common WebDriver-related flakiness.

• Strong support for cross-browser web testing with straightforward setup.

Core strengths

• Intuitive recording and editing for quick test creation by non-developers.

• Reliable execution model that doesn’t depend on external browser drivers.

• Solid CI integration and CLI support for scaling in pipelines.

• Built-in assertions, selectors, and utilities for robust web E2E checks.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• TestCafe Studio focuses on web E2E, not native iOS/Android. If your mobile use case is mobile web, it can be part of your toolkit. For native SDK visual validation, it is not a direct replacement.

• You can complement TestCafe Studio with a visual snapshot tool, but it will not replicate Visual AI-driven diffing out of the box.

Best for

• Teams seeking a stable, codeless web E2E tool, especially when mobile testing needs are limited to responsive/mobile web rather than native apps.

6) Waldo

Waldo is a commercial, no-code mobile testing platform for iOS and Android. Built by Waldo, it offers a recorder-driven workflow and cloud execution, making it easy to create, run, and maintain tests without writing code. It focuses on end-to-end mobile UI coverage with an emphasis on speed and simplicity.

What makes it different

• Pure no-code authoring with a hosted device cloud for scalable runs.

• Visual-first approach to creating and maintaining tests quickly.

• Designed specifically for native mobile apps, not just mobile web.

Core strengths

• Very fast onboarding for non-technical users through recording and point-and-click flows.

• Cloud-based parallelization for quick feedback and broad device coverage.

• Centralized results, artifacts, and diagnostics for easier triage.

• Reduces the need to manage local device labs or complex SDKs.

Comparison to Applitools for Mobile

• Waldo trades Visual AI baselines for no-code authoring and cloud convenience. If your primary pain is the cost and complexity of maintaining SDK-based tests and baselines, Waldo’s workflow may be more approachable.

• If you need high-fidelity visual diffs with tunable match levels and precise baseline control, Applitools for Mobile remains stronger in that specific dimension.

Best for

• Teams that want native mobile coverage quickly, value no-code authoring, and prefer not to manage device infrastructure or complex SDK integrations.

Things to Consider Before Choosing an Alternative

Before selecting an Applitools for Mobile alternative, evaluate your constraints and objectives across the following dimensions:

• Application scope

• Test authoring model

• Language and framework support

• Handling dynamic UIs

• Execution speed and scalability

• CI/CD integration

• Debugging and triage

• Governance and collaboration

• Cost and licensing

• Vendor lock-in and migration

A practical approach is to run a time-boxed proof of concept with 3–5 representative test cases per candidate tool:

• Include at least one dynamic screen and one locale/theme variant.

• Measure setup time, test stability, false positive rate, and the speed of reviewing failures.

• Evaluate CI integration and the clarity of reporting.

• Involve both developers and QA to gauge usability across roles.

Conclusion

Applitools for Mobile remains a strong, widely used choice for bringing AI-powered visual testing to native iOS and Android apps. Its ability to catch subtle visual regressions, paired with mature SDKs and dashboards, continues to serve teams that need high-fidelity UI validation.

Still, alternatives may better match specific needs:

• If you want to standardize visual testing across web, mobile, and desktop with one engine, Applitools Eyes broadens the reach of your current approach.

• If your focus is web and API with some mobile web coverage—and you prefer low-code authoring—Mabl provides an integrated E2E solution with visual checks included.

• If you need fast, developer-friendly visual diffs for web UIs, Percy’s snapshot model keeps workflows simple and CI-centric.

• If codeless, mobile-first testing with computer vision appeals to you and you want to minimize baseline management, Repeato is a strong candidate.

• If your mobile needs are mostly responsive/mobile web and you want stable, codeless web E2E automation, TestCafe Studio can fit well.

• If you want no-code native mobile coverage with cloud execution and minimal setup, Waldo streamlines authoring and scaling across devices.

Choosing the right tool depends on your app mix, the skills on your team, and how you weigh visual precision against ease of authoring and ongoing maintenance. In many organizations, the best outcome comes from a hybrid strategy—for example, using a visual-testing platform where pixel-perfect validation is critical, and a codeless or low-code E2E tool for broader regression coverage. To make implementation smoother, consider leveraging hosted device clouds and CI-native workflows so your test feedback is fast, reliable, and easy for the whole team to act on.