Top 7 Alternatives to Shot (Kakao) for Kotlin Testing

Introduction: Where Shot (Kakao) Fits in Android Testing

Screenshot testing on Android gained traction as teams sought faster visual regression checks without relying solely on manual QA. Shot (often used alongside Kotlin-centric UI DSLs such as Kakao and mainstream UI frameworks) emerged to make Android screenshot testing simpler, repeatable, and CI-friendly. As an open-source tool under the Apache-2.0 license, Shot aligned well with Kotlin-based codebases and Gradle-driven build pipelines. It became popular because it helped developers automatically capture, compare, and approve screenshots as part of their test runs, catching visual regressions early in the development lifecycle.

Shot’s strengths come from its narrow but valuable focus:

• It is a well-established, open-source screenshot testing utility for Android.

• It integrates cleanly into automated pipelines.

• It supports Kotlin-first workflows and Android studio/Gradle setups familiar to most mobile teams.

That niche focus is also its limitation. While Shot excels at verifying visual changes, teams often need more than screenshots:

• Broader UI automation beyond a single app.

• System-level interactions.

• Stronger support for non-visual assertions, performance checks, and cross-platform (iOS/web) scenarios.

• Faster, emulator-free feedback loops.

As Android teams scale and modernize, many explore complementary or alternative tools. Below are seven options that cover a spectrum—from native Kotlin-based UI testing to codeless platforms—so you can choose the best fit for your Kotlin projects and your broader QA strategy.

Overview: The Top 7 Alternatives to Shot (Kakao)

Here are the top 7 alternatives for Shot (Kakao):

• Espresso

• Paparazzi (Cash App)

• UI Automator

• Repeato

• Waldo

• Mabl

• TestCafe Studio

Why Look for Shot (Kakao) Alternatives?

• Visual-only scope: Screenshot testing is excellent for catching visual regressions, but it does not replace functional UI automation, system-level testing, or API validation.

• Baseline management overhead: Maintaining and reviewing baseline images can become time-consuming, especially with dynamic UIs, theming, localization, and device density variations.

• Device/emulator dependencies: Running screenshot tests on emulators or real devices introduces variability and infrastructure maintenance, which can slow CI cycles.

• Rendering and flakiness: Minor OS, font, or rendering differences may cause false positives unless carefully controlled, increasing test maintenance costs.

• Limited cross-platform coverage: Shot is Android-focused. Many teams also need iOS or web coverage, or unified reporting across platforms and test types.

• Reporting and analytics: Basic visual diffs help, but larger organizations may want richer dashboards, trend analysis, and robust failure diagnostics.

• Integration depth: Some teams require deep CI/CD integration, advanced test orchestration, and collaboration features that go beyond what a single-purpose screenshot tool provides.

Alternative 1: Espresso

What it is and who built it

Espresso is the official Android UI testing framework maintained as part of the Android Testing Support Library. It is widely used for instrumented UI tests on Android, pairing naturally with Kotlin or Java codebases and integrating seamlessly with Gradle-based projects.

Core strengths

• Official and well-supported: Backed by the Android team, broadly documented, and compatible with modern Android tooling.

• Precise synchronization: Built-in mechanisms for waiting on the UI thread reduce flaky timing issues when tests are well-structured.

• Kotlin-friendly: First-class compatibility with Kotlin and common Android architectural patterns.

• Broad assertions and actions: Interact with UI components, verify behavior, and combine with test doubles for robust end-to-end validation.

• CI-friendly: Works with standard Android CI/CD pipelines.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Scope: Espresso goes beyond visual diffs. It focuses on functional UI testing—interactions, state, and behavior—while Shot focuses on visual regression via screenshots.

• Flakiness and determinism: When tests are structured well, Espresso’s synchronization can reduce flakiness. Shot can be sensitive to subtle rendering differences unless baselines and environments are tightly controlled.

• Visual verification: Espresso does not do screenshot testing natively. You could pair Espresso with a screenshot library, but Shot consolidates that visual testing workflow by design.

When it stands out

Use Espresso when you want comprehensive, code-driven UI automation in Kotlin, with robust assertions and close integration with the Android toolchain. It’s a core building block for most Android test suites and complements (or replaces) screenshot-only checks.

Alternative 2: Paparazzi (Cash App)

What it is and who built it

Paparazzi is an open-source screenshot testing tool from the Cash App team. It runs UI screenshot tests on the JVM, which means you can generate and validate screenshots without launching an emulator or connecting a device.

Core strengths

• Emulator-free speed: By running on the JVM, Paparazzi significantly reduces setup time and flakiness associated with devices/emulators.

• Deterministic results: Less reliance on external device state can yield more stable visual comparisons.

• Kotlin-first workflows: Works naturally with Kotlin and modern Android build systems.

• Solid community adoption: It is a popular option in the Android ecosystem for stable, fast screenshot testing.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Execution model: Paparazzi reduces environment variability by avoiding emulators, which can mean faster and more deterministic runs compared to device-based screenshots with Shot.

• Feature focus: Both focus on screenshot testing. However, Paparazzi’s JVM-based approach often simplifies CI setup and speeds feedback.

• Complementary use: Teams migrating away from device/emulator-based screenshot tests may find Paparazzi a more efficient alternative.

When it stands out

Choose Paparazzi if you want the benefits of screenshot testing without the friction of emulator/device orchestration. It is especially useful for teams that want visual regression checks tightly integrated with Kotlin code and fast CI feedback loops.

Alternative 3: UI Automator

What it is and who built it

UI Automator is a system-level UI testing framework for Android. It allows automation across apps and the Android system UI, and it is an open-source option from the Android ecosystem.

Core strengths

• Cross-app/system-level coverage: Test flows that cross app boundaries, interact with notifications, or involve settings and permissions dialogs.

• Kotlin/Java support: Plays well with Android’s standard languages and build tools.

• Strong for device-level scenarios: Validate behavior that requires interacting with background services, multi-app workflows, or device policies.

• CI integration: Can be used in existing pipelines with emulator farms or real devices.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Scope: UI Automator is about functional, end-to-end automation at the system level. Shot remains focused on visual regression within your app.

• Visual vs. behavior: UI Automator does not emphasize visual diffing. It provides more functional coverage for complex device-level paths that screenshots cannot capture.

• Overhead: System-level tests can be more complex and slower to run than JVM-based screenshot solutions; however, they address a broader set of automation needs.

When it stands out

Use UI Automator when you must automate cross-app flows, handle system dialogs, or validate behavior that lies beyond a single app’s UI—especially useful for enterprise or device-management contexts.

Alternative 4: Repeato

What it is and who built it

Repeato is a commercial, codeless mobile UI testing tool for Android and iOS. It emphasizes computer vision (CV) to make tests more resilient to structural UI changes, which can reduce maintenance churn.

Core strengths

• Codeless with computer vision: Create tests by interaction and visual matching, which can be resilient to layout tweaks.

• Cross-platform: One platform to manage Android and iOS tests, with consistent reporting and management.

• CI/CD-friendly: Cloud and local execution options that integrate into modern pipelines.

• Team collaboration: Non-engineers can contribute to the test suite using a visual recorder and dashboards.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Scope and audience: Shot is developer-centric and focused on visual diffs for Android. Repeato targets broader, codeless UI automation across Android and iOS with CV-based locators.

• Visual vs. visual: Shot compares pixel-level screenshots. Repeato uses vision to identify elements and run functional steps, which can also include visual checks but with a different approach.

• Kotlin alignment: While Repeato is not Kotlin-specific, it complements Kotlin Android projects by offloading routine UI checks to a codeless layer, freeing developer time.

When it stands out

Pick Repeato if you need cross-platform mobile UI automation with lower maintenance overhead, and want non-developers to contribute without writing Kotlin or Java test code.

Alternative 5: Waldo

What it is and who built it

Waldo is a commercial, no-code mobile testing platform for Android and iOS. It offers a recorder-driven approach, cloud executions, and collaborative workflows designed to scale with product teams.

Core strengths

• No-code recorder: Create tests quickly by recording interactions, suitable for teams with mixed engineering backgrounds.

• Cloud-first runs: Execute at scale across device models and OS versions without managing infrastructure.

• Visual regression: Built-in visual comparisons and UI validations with centralized reports.

• Collaboration and CI: Share results with stakeholders and plug into CI pipelines with minimal setup.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Broader scope: Waldo covers functional UI tests and visual checks across Android and iOS, while Shot focuses on Android screenshots.

• Overhead vs. ease: Shot is developer-centric and light to integrate for Kotlin projects. Waldo reduces setup and infrastructure burden at the expense of a commercial subscription.

• Reporting depth: Waldo’s dashboards and analytics can exceed what you get from a pure screenshot tool.

When it stands out

Choose Waldo if you prefer a cloud-first, no-code approach for mobile test coverage, want visual regression and functional checks together, and value collaboration and reporting out of the box.

Alternative 6: Mabl

What it is and who built it

Mabl is a commercial, low-code and AI-assisted end-to-end testing platform primarily for web and API testing. It is designed as a SaaS-first solution to accelerate authoring, maintenance, and execution at scale.

Core strengths

• Low-code authoring: Build stable web tests quickly with AI assistance and self-healing selectors.

• API and end-to-end coverage: Combine UI and API validations for full-stack assurance.

• Integrated analytics and reporting: Centralized dashboards, trends, and insights.

• CI/CD integration: Mature tooling for continuous testing in modern delivery pipelines.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Platform focus: Shot is Android-only and focused on visual diffs. Mabl is primarily for web and API testing. For Kotlin Android teams, Mabl complements mobile automation by covering the web and backend layers that support the mobile app.

• Visual vs. functional breadth: Shot’s value lies in catching Android UI regressions visually. Mabl provides functional breadth across web UIs and APIs, with sophisticated self-healing to reduce maintenance.

• Team model: Mabl caters to broader QA organizations that need centralized management and reporting beyond mobile.

When it stands out

Consider Mabl if your Kotlin-based Android app relies heavily on web backends or portals and you want a low-code, centralized platform for web and API testing in CI/CD.

Alternative 7: TestCafe Studio

What it is and who built it

TestCafe Studio is a commercial, codeless IDE for web UI testing, developed by the company behind the TestCafe framework. It enables teams to author, run, and debug browser tests without writing code, while offering an upgrade path to code when needed.

Core strengths

• Codeless web test authoring: Record and edit flows quickly in a desktop IDE.

• Cross-browser coverage: Validate web behavior across multiple browsers.

• CI-ready: Integrates into continuous testing workflows with parallel execution.

• Developer handoff: Tests created in the IDE can align with underlying code-based TestCafe projects.

How it compares to Shot (Kakao)

• Platform: Shot targets Android visual diffs; TestCafe Studio targets web UI automation. They address different parts of a typical product stack.

• Complementary coverage: If your Kotlin app interacts with a web backend, admin portal, or web onboarding flow, TestCafe Studio helps cover those surfaces with minimal scripting.

• Maintenance: While screenshot baselines can drift in Shot, TestCafe Studio focuses on selectors and web flows, with visual checks as an add-on rather than the core.

When it stands out

Use TestCafe Studio to expand your test strategy beyond Android and cover web frontends that your mobile app depends on. It is suitable for teams who prefer codeless workflows and fast onboarding for non-developers.

Choosing Among Alternatives: A Practical Checklist

Before selecting a Shot (Kakao) alternative, consider the following:

• Project scope and platform mix:

• Language support and team skills:

• Ease of setup and execution speed:

• CI/CD integration and maintenance:

• Debugging and reporting:

• Determinism and flakiness control:

• Scalability and parallelization:

• Cost and licensing:

Putting It All Together: Example Paths

• If you like Shot but want faster, more deterministic screenshot tests:

• If you need functional UI testing with Kotlin:

• If your tests cross app boundaries and system dialogs:

• If your team needs cross-platform mobile coverage without writing tests in Kotlin:

• If your Kotlin app relies on a web frontend or backend:

Conclusion

Shot (Kakao) earned its place by making Android screenshot testing accessible, automatable, and Kotlin-friendly. It remains a valuable tool when you need quick, focused visual regression checks. However, teams often need more breadth—faster and more deterministic execution, functional UI automation, system-level coverage, cross-platform support, and richer reporting.

• Choose Paparazzi when you want speed and determinism in screenshot testing without emulators.

• Choose Espresso for robust, code-driven Android UI automation in Kotlin.

• Choose UI Automator for system-level or cross-app flows.

• Choose Repeato or Waldo if you want codeless, cross-platform mobile testing with strong reporting and CI integrations.

• Choose Mabl or TestCafe Studio to expand into web and API coverage that complements your Kotlin Android app.

The best solution often blends tools: use Espresso for behavior, Paparazzi or Shot for visuals, and add a codeless or web-focused platform where it makes sense. That layered strategy balances speed, coverage, and maintainability—helping your Kotlin team deliver confidently, sprint after sprint.