Skip to content
testcritic

Autify vs TestDriver

Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.

Entry price

Quote on request

Quote only

From $20 per seat/month (120 testing minutes included, then $0.14/minute)

Free tier

What drives the bill

The metric that actually scales your invoice.

Quote-based annual contracts sized by test runs.

The seat price is the small half of the bill: $20 per seat covers 120 testing minutes, then metering kicks in at $0.14 a minute (about $8.40 an hour). Seats are billed for every GitHub user who gets a PR review or runs a test, and a vision model driving a desktop is slower per test than a headless browser — model the minutes before committing a large suite.

Free tier

Two-week free trial.

Free trial rather than a standing free tier; paid seats include 120 testing minutes a month.

Open source

Self-hostable

No-code authoring

Languages

CodelessJavaScript
JavaScriptTypeScriptCodeless

Platforms

WebiOSAndroid
WebDesktop

Fits teams

Scale-up / mid-marketEnterprise
StartupScale-up / mid-market

Adoption

Emerging

Autify, Inc. · since 2016

Niche

TestDriver

Strengths

  • Very low barrier to a first working suite — recording plus a managed browser cloud.
  • Maintenance burden is genuinely reduced by the self-healing model.
  • Covers web and native mobile from one vendor.
  • Tests surfaces nothing else reaches — browser extensions, packaged desktop apps, canvas and third-party OAuth screens.
  • No selectors to maintain, so a refactor that renames every class breaks nothing.
  • Runs per pull request in a disposable sandbox rather than against a shared staging environment.

Limitations

  • No self-hosted option.
  • Limited support for complex data-driven scenarios.
  • Smaller international presence and support footprint than the US vendors.
  • A vision model is non-deterministic. Reruns of an unchanged test do not always take the same path, which makes a genuine failure harder to distinguish from a bad frame.
  • Billed by testing hours, and driving a real desktop is slow — a suite that costs pennies on Playwright can cost real money here.
  • Young product with a small community; expect to be an early reporter of your own bugs.

Best for

Small QA teams that need automation without an engineering hire.

Teams testing extensions, desktop apps or canvas-heavy UIs, where selector-based runners simply cannot see the thing under test.

All of these integrate with: Slack, GitHub Actions.

Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.