Playwright vs Cypress vs Selenium — Which for Your Startup?
Quick, practical guide to choose Playwright, Cypress, or Selenium for your startup. Compare speed, browser support, team skill needs, and cost.
Introduction — choose the right tool
Startups move fast. The right test tool saves time and money, the wrong one wastes both. This short guide helps founders and small teams pick between Playwright, Cypress, and Selenium based on real startup needs — speed, browser coverage, team skills, and long-term maintainability.
Quick summary (1-line)
Playwright: modern, fast, great cross-browser support. Best if you want future-proof automation and run tests in multiple browsers.
Cypress: easiest to start with for web apps (especially React/Angular/Vue) and great for local debugging, but limited cross-browser features historically.
Selenium: battle-tested, broad language support and integrations; good for complex enterprise needs or when you must support very old browsers.
Decision checklist (simple step-by-step)
How many browsers must you support?
Multiple modern browsers + WebKit? Choose Playwright.
Chrome-only or mainly Chromium? Cypress is excellent.
Need legacy IE/Edge Legacy or very wide tool-language support? Consider Selenium.
How fast do you want tests running?
Fast parallel runs → Playwright (built for parallelization).
Local interactive debugging → Cypress (great developer experience).
Selenium can be slower and harder to parallelize unless you invest in infra.
Who will write tests? (team skill)
JavaScript/TypeScript team → Playwright or Cypress (both use JS/TS).
Mixed languages (Java, Python, C#) → Selenium may make sense.
Do you need visual regression or cross-device checks?
For screenshots + mobile emulation → Playwright has good built-in capabilities.
Cypress can do screenshot testing via plugins.
Selenium can, but often needs extra tools.
How much maintenance can you afford?
Minimal maintenance + quick wins → Cypress for small teams.
Medium to long-term robust test suites → Playwright (less brittle for modern apps).
Heavy legacy coverage requires Selenium, but budget for maintenance.
CI / Parallel runs / Cloud:
All three integrate with CI/CD. Playwright and Cypress have simpler modern pipelines and cloud options.
Practical scenarios (pick one that matches your startup)
MVP, rapid releases, small dev team (JS/TS): Start with Cypress for speed to value, then migrate high-value tests to Playwright later.
Growing SaaS, multi-browser support, long-term scale: Start with Playwright.
If you must support many languages or legacy enterprise browsers: Use Selenium, but plan for higher maintenance.
Example short plan (for a 4-week ramp)
Week 1: Pick one framework and write 10 smoke tests (login, signup, critical flows).
Week 2: Add CI integration for those 10 tests and run on PRs.
Week 3: Add parallel runs for fast feedback (Playwright/Cypress cloud or self-host).
Week 4: Build a strategy for flaky tests and add basic reporting.
Tips for hiring and cost control
Hire someone who can write clear end-to-end tests and also explain failures. For startups, JS/TS automation testers (Playwright/Cypress) give fastest ROI.
Start with a small critical-path test suite (5–15 tests) before expanding. Focus on high-impact flows that hurt revenue.
contact@qanade.com
Pune, Maharashta, India.
“Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of intelligent effort.” — John Ruskin
