Comprehensive Evaluation of Web Application Testing Tools

This report provides a comprehensive evaluation of web application testing tools, focusing on their methodologies, implementation, and comparison. It begins with an introduction to testing concepts and web application specifics, highlighting the importance of web testing due to the increasing complexity and user load of web applications. Various testing tools, including Webload, TestIO, Acunetix, TestingWhiz, HPE Unified Functional Testing, Ranorex, Selenium, JMeter, TestComplete, Google Pagespeed Insight, GTmetrix, and Pingdom, are examined. The report uses archival research methodology to compare these tools based on factors like implementation, usage, technical support, and maintainability. Test scenarios and cross-browser comparisons are conducted to assess the tools' performance and effectiveness, with results discussed in detail. The conclusion recommends the best tool for web application testing based on the analysis.

EVALUATION OF WEB TESTING TOOL
(Student Name)
(University)

Table of Contents
Table of figures................................................................................................................................4
List of tables....................................................................................................................................5
List of abbreviations........................................................................................................................6
Abstract............................................................................................................................................7
I. CHAPTER ONE.......................................................................................................................8
1.0 Overview of chapter one........................................................................................................8
1.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................8
1.1.1 Definition of Testing.......................................................................................................8
1.1.2 Division of testing.........................................................................................................12
1.1.3 White Box testing and black box type of testing...........................................................13
1.1.3 Web application testing.................................................................................................14
1.1.3 Benefits of web application testing...............................................................................17
1.1.4 Problem statement.........................................................................................................18
1.1.5 Objective of this research paper....................................................................................18
1.1.6 Research question..........................................................................................................19
1.1.7 Principles of web application testing.............................................................................19
1.1.8 Research gap..................................................................................................................19
II CHAPTER TWO.......................................................................................................................21
2.0 Overview of chapter two......................................................................................................21

2.1 Materials and methods.........................................................................................................22
2.1.1 Related works................................................................................................................22
2.1.1 Software testing tools....................................................................................................22
2.1.1.1 Webload......................................................................................................................23
2.1.1.2 TestIO tool..................................................................................................................24
2.1.1.3 Acunetix web application testing tool........................................................................25
2.1.1.4 TestingWhiz web application testing tool..................................................................26
2.1.1.5 HPE unified web application functional testing tool..................................................27
2.1.1.6 Ranorex......................................................................................................................28
2.1.1.7 Selenium.....................................................................................................................28
2.1.1.8 JMeter.........................................................................................................................29
2.1.1.9 TestComplete Web application tool...........................................................................29
2.1.1.10 Google Pagespeed Insight Web application tool......................................................30
2.1.1.11 GTmetrix Web application tool................................................................................31
2.1.1.12 Pingdom Web application tool.................................................................................31
2.2 Traditional web application methodologies.........................................................................32
CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................................34
III. Methodology............................................................................................................................34
3.1 Automated Software Testing tools.......................................................................................34
3.2 Archival research methodology...........................................................................................34

3.2.1 Why use archival data...................................................................................................34
3.3 overview of comparison from archival research methodology [24]....................................36
1V CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................38
4.0 Test..........................................................................................................................................38
4.1 Test scenario............................................................................................................................38
4.3 Cross browser comparison.......................................................................................................39
V CHAPTER FIVE.......................................................................................................................43
5.0 Results......................................................................................................................................43
5.1 Discussion................................................................................................................................50
6.0 Conclusion and recommendation............................................................................................51
References......................................................................................................................................53

Table of figures
Figure 1: Illustration of testing......................................................................................................10
Figure 2: Methods of testing..........................................................................................................12
Figure 3: Usability testing of a web application............................................................................16
Figure 4:WebLoad tool..................................................................................................................26
Figure 5: TestingWhiz tool............................................................................................................29
Figure 6: Ranorex tool...................................................................................................................31
Figure 7: Google Pagespeed Insight..............................................................................................34
Figure 8: PingDom tool.................................................................................................................36
Figure 9: A graph showing the average mean time for one, fifty, and one hundred users............50
Figure 10: Number of tools vs the type of testing.........................................................................53
Figure 11: Number of open source tools vs. the licensed tool.......................................................53

List of tables
Table 1: Other web application testing challenges........................................................................17
Table 2: A summary of a comparison of the four best web-application.......................................45
Table 3: Technical Support services..............................................................................................45
Table 4: Selenium comparison with other tools............................................................................46
Table 5: Comparison of the various types of web application tools..............................................47
Table 6: Web application testing activities....................................................................................49
Table 7: Results for performance testing for selenium..................................................................50
Table 8: A Comparison of the various web application testing tools............................................53

List of abbreviations
SSL-Secure Socket Layer
QA-Quality Assurance
IDE-Integrated Development Environment
XML- Extensible Mark-up Langauge
AJAX- Asynchronous JavaScript and XML
GB- GigaByte
AMD- Advanced Micro Devices
GUI- Graphical User Interface
HTML-Hypertext Mark-up Language
ROI-Return on Investment
SAP- System Applications and Products
JDBC: Java Database Connectivity
SMTP: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
MAC- Media Access Control
RAM- Random Access Memory
IPv6: Internet Protocol Version six

Abstract
Testing software and application after development is an important part of software
development. Web applications continue to grow and their requirements on their performance
also continue to grow as they are exposed to a higher load of users and an increased web
technology. This makes the subject web testing important and of great interest to the web
application designers. Also due to the fact that web application development is costly and time-
consuming, testing is the only way which can lead to cheaper maintenance and development.
There are various tools which have been developed in response to web testing. An example is the
Microsoft Product Application Center Test. Specifically, this tool is used to simulate multiple
users by generating requests. The tests are then automated where the results are then presented in
charts. This paper discusses web application subject in detail with a more focus to web
application tools
This research paper explores the current trends in web application. The paper is divided into
five chapters where the first chapter introduces web application. The second chapter has outlined
the various web application tools and selected the best web application testing tools and
compared them according to various factors. Based on the analysis, the paper has settled on the
best web application tool.
Therefore this research paper seeks to describe and explore the current trends in web
application testing. This is achieved at first exploring the various web application tools and then
selecting the best-automated web application testing tools and comparing them, according to
implementation, their usage, the provided technical support and maintainability. The work goal
is to propose the best tool which can be used at the testing phase of a web application.

I. CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Overview of chapter one
This chapter defines what is testing and a broad definition of web application testing. The
chapter has also stated the objectives of this thesis paper and the research question. In addition,
the chapter has stated the reasons as to why web application testing is important.
1.1 Introduction
Anything needs to be tested before it is used. Testing is everywhere, whether it is
hardware or software everything needs to be tested before it is taken into use. English testing
means everything which can be tried out. In computer science, testing is an act of searching
faults in software. This is done by system analyst by executing parts of the software; it is the act
of testing with some predefined data. The main motivation is to prove that the program or the
software is working as required and producing the correct results. A simple testing definition is
as shown by the diagram below. Here data is given as input which is then executed with inputted
data. Testing is usually corrected done if the results are correct and when the inner state has been
changed to another state [1].
1.1.1 Definition of Testing
Web testing is a name given to software testing which focusses on web applications. It is
the process of checking whether a web application has bugs before the web code is moved into a
production environment or for any potential bugs. It is a web testing where web security is
checked, the ability of the site to handle traffic, and the regular users of the site.

Figure 1: Illustration of testing

In software and applications, good testing usually includes test planning, creation of test
environments, viewing the results, and test cases. These four phases usually take half of the
resources reserved for application testing. When testing a new program such as a web
application, it starts from the beginning. The planning phase usually specifies how testing is to
be done. Testing results in mistake, bug, and language error. Error is defined as a deviation from
specifications; the application is doing something that it is not supposed to do. Also, errors can
result in a program or an application working very slowly; usually the user has trouble using it.
Jukka defines error as a human function that causes application defects. A fault is the reason for
the failure of an application [2]
There are usually four levels of testing during software or application development. This
is as shown by figure 2 below

Figure 2: Methods of testing

As shown by figure 2, in-unit testing an individual component or a unit is tested. The
major aim of this part is to make a single module in an application or a program to work
correctly. In here unit testing is usually carried out by the unit implementer. Here testing can be
done by some Personal Computer which resembles a real application or systems. Testbed is used
to simulate the functionality of the module or the unit [3].
When all the modules are combined together and tested it is what is referred to as
integration testing. The major aim of integration testing is to find any errors or omissions
between the integrated units. It is at this level that makes sure that the work is done correctly.
This means that testing needs to start from a low level all the way to the upper level [4].
System testing level usually tests the various parts of an application or the system; this
usually consists of units or modules which have been integrated into a complete system. The idea
behind this level is to make shire that the whole system complies with the predefined
requirements. In addition, this level tests both non-functional and functional requirements. Some
of the non-functional requirements tested are usability, reliability, and performance. The results
of non-functional requirements are compared with functional requirements. The person who
performs non-functional testing ought to be independent of the development of the system
people.
As shown by figure system testing is then followed by acceptance testing. This level evaluates
the application against the application requirements and it assists in deciding whether the
application is ready for delivery [5].

1.1.2 Division of testing
According to the way, testing is performed it can be executed by humans. The first
division of testing is manual testing which in this case involves manual tasks like setting up tests
environment and executing tested functionality, reviewing and collecting the results and
recording the found issues. The second division which has been highly exploited in this paper is
automated testing; which is the execution of tests without human intervention. Usually,
automated testing includes the ability to run a subset of all tests, capturing the results, running
the test cases, automatic set-up and recording of environmental variables, and analysis the
processing and results in a comprehensive and clear way.
One of the benefits of manual testing is that the set-up time is shorter as compared to
automatic testing. One of the major drawbacks of manual testing is that it leads to incorrect or
inaccurate results. Also, the execution of test cases is slower than automated testing. One of the
benefits of automated testing is that it assists in the elimination of human errors. Second
automated tests are faster as compared to manual testing.Third automated testing can lead to cost
reductions
1.1.3 White Box testing and black box type of testing
The basic testing method is a box-based approach. Box approach is divided into two
which are black-box testing and white box testing. These two approaches are used to describe a
point of view of the test engineer. Black box testing is where a tester does not have any
information about the internal procedure and working of a web application testing. Black box
testing which is also known as the closed box is a data-driven testing that tests the functional part
of a web application. On the other hand, white box testing is structural testing or a code based
type of testing. In white-box type of testing, one has full knowledge of the internal working of

the web application. It is also important to note that the black box type of testing is based on the
external expectation as the internal behavior of a web application is unknown. On the hand in
white box testing, the internal working of a web application is fully known by the tester. Lastly,
white box testing is exhaustive and very time consuming [6].
1.1.3 Web application testing
The previous section highlighted extensively what is testing, the elements of testing. This
part will focus on web testing. In addition, as highlighted there are several web applications that
are being developed on a daily basis and with each line of code being written for web
applications, potential bugs arise on a daily basis. This raises the need for web testing. Web
testing is an important part of any application development yet some developers underestimate
this process. The chance of bug appearing increased with every life of code. There are six basics
of web application testing; the first one is functionality testing [7]. This step is specifically used
to make sure that the web application is working correctly. Specifically, this faces checks if a
database connection is working. This is done in the early stages of development so as to build up
the whole process of app building. It usually reduces the risks towards the end of the cycle. A
typical functionality testing in web application usually includes identification of functions that
the web application is supposed to do, the analysis of the actual results, the execution of the test
cases, and data input of the test case. Usually, the tester here is supposed to simulate the actual
application and creates test conditions that are related to the user requirements. Usability testing
is the second phase which goes beyond the first test. This step combines both the user experience
and functionality testing. This step usually involves developing the testing strategy which
ensures that all functions of the application or the program are examined and included in the

content and navigation. Second, the recruits test participants either externally or internally. Third,
tests are done under the experts’ observation and lastly is analyzing the results so as to improve
the web application accordingly [8]. The process of usability testing is done as shown by the
diagram below
Figure 3: Usability testing of a web application
The next phase is interface testing; in here the web application tester checks whether or
not there an interaction between the web server and the app server. In here not all the
communication is tested but also the displaying of error messages. It is also by this phase that the
interruptions by the user and the server are handled. The next phase is compatibility testing,
which ensures that the web application is compatible with all the devices and various browsers
[9]. There are various elements of compatibility testing; the first element is browser
compatibility; here the tester checks whether the application is compatible across various

browsers. Here the tester checks whether Ajax, authentication requests, browser notifications,
and JavaScript are working correctly. Operating system compatibility is also checked at this
phase, where the tester checks of the application runs smoothly on Unixes, Linux, Windows, and
macOS. Mobile compatibility is also done at this phase; here the tester checks whether the
application is running smoothly on various mobile devices [9].
The fifth phase is performance testing; in here the tester checks whether the application is
responsive to all applications and it performs under very heavy load. This usually includes
testing under a very heavy load under different internet speeds and how the application behaves
under peak and normal loads. In addition, this phase tests application resiliency; how the web
application performs under stress and various hardware configurations. The final testing in web
application is security testing; this makes sure that the application is protected against
unauthorized access or any form of harmful actions via malicious software and other viruses.
Usually, security testing involves four activities that are testing whether all the secured pages can
be accessed, verifying the application SSL, makings sure that the restricted files cannot be
accessed or downloaded without adequate authorization, and checking that all the open sessions
are closed after an ongoing user activity. Security checklist comes hand in hand on this stage and
ought to include tasks such as secure transmission, error handling, session management, secure
transmission, and authorization, denial of service, specific functionality tests, and cryptography.
This means that security testing has five major goals which are identifying the web application
security needs, preparing a test plan, automated testing on top of manual testing, carrying out the
best security test cases, retesting, and fixing identifying defects [10].
From the above web testing steps, it means that web application testing is the practice of
testing web applications or websites for potential bugs. It is a complete testing of designed web

applications. The web applications need to be tested from end to end before the application goes
live for the end-users. The web application testing checklist ought to have six components which
functionality testing, usability testing, interface testing, compatibility testing, performance
testing, and security testing [11].
There are four major types of web testing which are simple static testing, dynamic
testing, e-commerce website testing, and mobile testing. In static testing few points are
considered which are testing the GUI design, checking the page web-application links, and
checking the scroll bar carefully. Dynamic web testing is where the designer checks if the user
can change or update the web application regularly [12]
1.1.3 Benefits of web application testing
Testing is any application development is the first step to quality assurance. The major
aim of testing is to not necessarily to verify the finished work with the initial specifications of the
contributor but to ensure that the application is user-friendly. In addition, testing does not only
ensure the finding of bugs in an application but also to control the quality of the application.
Meaning the first customer of testing is the quality assurance team [13].
There are various advantages of web testing. First is that it ensures complete correctness
of the web application. As highlighted previously, web application testing is carried out in layers
or levels. This means that web testing ensures completeness and correctness of the web
application. Second web testing increases confidence in the performance and functioning of the
web application before the web application is released. Third, testing reduces future risks; the
web application is tested rigorously after every sprint and iteration. Meaning that there very few
chances of risks and failure in the future. Fort, testing decreases repetitive efforts. As a web
application is tested thoroughly then it means that they are no looking back; it reduces the

chances of a breakdown. Fifth web-testing reduces costs and time via what is known as an
automation testing tool. Sixth, web application testing boosts on customer satisfaction; it is
through testing that web application quality is reached; testing here ensures that customers'
patience is not taxed with a defective web application. Seventh, web testing comes together with
profit; testing is part of profit-making. Offering a rigorously tested and quality checked web
application.
Other advantages of web testing are;
 Overcoming the blindness to issues when a designer or a project manager has been
looking at the same time
 Ensures high-quality web application that generates better results
 Alleviates the pressure of the designing team
 By carrying out all the steps of web application testing then a comprehensive testing is
completed no matter how the designing team are busy
 Web application testing provides what designers refer to as additional level of testing by
allowing testing to be carried as per the web application steps [14]
1.1.4 Problem statement
Web application testing or software testing is a very difficult task. This is because of the
peculiarities of some programs and applications. According to Giuseppe, in the last past years
there have been several issues specifically in the field of web application testing which has
resulted in several research work done; in web application testing techniques and methods of
web-application testing have been looked at widely but this is not adequate. This paper will look
at web application testing tools. Focusing on this will assist in finding out the best web-
application tools thus making web-based testing easily.

1.1.5 Objective of this research paper
The major aim of this paper is to conduct an evaluation of the best tool to be used for
testing web applications based on several criteria. To refer to the very best tool there is a lot of
factors to be considered such as browser compatibility, technical support, and integration. The
important part of this work is to compare several web application tools and suggest the best tool.
1.1.6 Research question
This thesis paper has systematically reviewed various web application tools. The leading
question can be put like:
 Which is the best web application testing tool
1.1.7 Principles of web application testing
There are seven principles of web application testing. First is exhaustive testing is not
possible. Exhaustive testing is not possible instead, designers need the optimal amount to test
which has to be based on risk assessment of the web application. Second is the defect clustering
principle; which states that a small number of modules can contain most defects that are
detected. This principle applies the Pareto principle to web application testing. Third, is the
principle of pesticide paradox; which states that repetitive test cases can be conducted to a web
application so as to discover any new trends; this is done to continually improve the existing
testing methods. Forth, is testing shows a presence of defects; hence any time designers talk of
testing the never mean absence of defects. The firth principle is the absence of error; fallacy.
When testing a web application, the absence of an error is a fallacy. Early testing is the sixth
principle; this states that testing ought to start as early as possible during web application
development; so that defects can be discovered early during web application design. Seventh is

testing is context-dependent; meaning that the way you test a web application is not the same
way one tests an e-commerce site.
1.1.8 Research gap
Web application testing is much common as desktop systems testing. From the previous
sections, web application testing consists of an analysis of the web application. It is important to
note that testing of web applications employing new technologies such as Flash, Active X plug-
in, AJAX, and rails have not been investigated so far. One of the major reasons as to why this
paper has focused on web application testing tool is because it is faced by major challenges. One
is the state navigation which is one of the prime concerns at the time of web application testing.
Most designers have stated that a process is required so as to fetch all dynamically updating
states. Currently, it is very difficult to find changes in before and after events because of various
reasons such as the entire page doesn’t repaint. Other web application testing tools are as shown
by the table shown below
Web application-specific faults
Incorrect multi-language problems
Cross-browser portability problems
Incorrect form construction
Authentication problem
Missing plugins
Incorrect cookie failure
Database updation failure
GUO faults
Link transition problems
Incorrect session management

Multi-tier architecture problems
Multi windows faults
Operating system compatibility
Table 1: Other web application testing challenges

II CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Overview of chapter two
This chapter starts by reviewing some of the related works related to web application
testing. The chapter has gone to review the various web application testing tools.
2.1 Materials and methods
2.1.1 Related works
Samad Paydar (2010), have focused on the framework of web-based systems. The author
has presented an agent-based framework for testing web-based applications. According to the
author, the major design goal is to develop a flexible and effective system. The framework has
been developed in such a way that it utilizes various sources of information about what the
author referees to as automate the test processes. The resulting frameworks is a system that
consists of a set of agents. Samer (2013), has focused on the comparison of the GUI automation
tools for dynamic web applications. According to the author, automating the process of software
testing assists the designing team in releasing a quality software or an application. It also
shortens the period of application development. The author has summarized the best guidelines
and practices for GUI functional tests against web applications. To find out the best GUI
practices, the author has given an overview of HTML as it is what all the automation tools try to
access [15].

2.1.1 Software testing tools
Web testing tools usually improve reliability, increases ROI (Return on Investment), and
turnaround time. There are various web testing tools that assist in diverse web application
testing. With web testing, issues like web functionality, usability, accessibility, performance, and
compatibility are released in public when web testing tools are used. This chapter will critically
analyze the various web application testing tools, list their features, pro, and cons.
To start with web application testing tools are categorized into seven categories which are
load, stress, and performance testing tools, W3C Link checker, cross-browser testing tools, web
functionality and regression testing tools, link manager testing tools, and web site security testing
tools.
2.1.1.1 Webload
Webload is one of the load testing tools or what is known as performance testing tool.
This tool combines performance, integrity, integrity, and scalability. This tool usually simulates
lots of users which makes it possible to test large loads and report any form of bottleneck. This
tool was first launched in August 1997. Since this time there have been about 20 versions of the
webLOAD. After 1997, the first version of Web load was in June 2010, the version was 8.5
which was side-by-side views and JAX based. The second version was in the same year version
8.6 which has statistical correlation. The third version in 2012; version 9.0 which was a load
testing tool from the cloud. The tool has the ability to probe a statistical client. The other version
was the 10.0 version which had the ability to supported IPv6 and had a new interface. Later
version 10.1, and version 10.2 were released in May 2013 and December 2014 consecutively.
The tow version has the Jenkins plug-in and web dashboard. Later version 10.3 and version the
latest version 10.3.1 were released in October 2015 and February 2016 consecutively. The latest

version had the ability to unfreeze and freeze a test during the integration or execution of a new
New Relic [16].
Features of webload
The current version, 10.3.1 has six major features which are IDE, Correlation, Load
generation, analytics, PMM, and web dashboard. With a web dashboard feature, the tool is able
to analyze performance tests results from any mobile device or browser. Second, with PMM
feature one is able to collect the server-side statistics during tests runs thus able to provide the
users with any additional data for root-cause analysis. With the Load generation feature, the tool
is able to generate from the cloud. IDE feature one is able to visually record and edit load tests
scripts. With the analytics feature, one is able to set a predefined analysis report which provides
performance data and assists users with identifying bottlenecks. Other features of webload
include; Mobile load testing, Technologies supported, Test creation, JavaScript, and Test
execution
One of the advantages of webload tool is that the tester is able to provide a clear analysis
of the web application. Second, one is able to pinpoint issues and the bottlenecks which may
stand on the way of achieving one load response requirements. Also with webload, a tester is
able to work with cloud providers such as Amazon to create a dry run of massive virtual user
load with load generation console on windows and Linux.
Another benefit of webload is that it offers a robust testing platform and flexibility. Also
one can create efficient load testing. Lastly, the tool has offered integration with Jenkins, app
dynamics, New Relic, amazon web dynamics, selenium, and dynatrace. Some of the cons of the
tool are; full functionalities for webload is not offered for free; a trial version is provided but
later one needs to purchase the tool so as to one can realize full functionality of the tool

Figure 4:WebLoad tool
2.1.1.2 TestIO tool
TestIO is another web testing, this tool makes sure that one web application works
everywhere by crowd testing. With this tool one is able to deliver the test. Some of the features
of this tool are; able to remove QA bottlenecks with flexible testing which scales up to one
needs. Test on rea; devices; this feature enables one to expand on one coverage to the hundreds
of platforms and devices. The device also ensures one of the professional testers have unbiased
eyes on the product.
Some of the advantages of the tool are able to integrate project management with bug
tracking tools. The tool also has the ability to offer a crowd-powered quality assurance testing
platform thus achieving enhanced efficiency and a more extensive reach among the actual web
application users. Second, with test IO tool one has the ability to uncover any programming
errors and at the same time provide contextual data to assist the designer in creating a more
efficient web application. Third, the tool has the ability to provide support to multiple browsers

and devices. In addition, the tool is compatible with most operating systems and is readily
available. Lastly, the tool provides a holistic platform for all various types of software be it web
application, web sites, iOS, mobile-optimized web software, and mobile apps. Some of the cons
of the tool are; TestIO is not provided even on trial version. The starter version with limited
capabilities is provided with 3000 dollars per month, the professional version is provided at a
cost of 4500 dollars per month. Also, as compared with webload testing tool, the response time
of this tool can go up to 24 hours.
2.1.1.3 Acunetix web application testing tool
Acunetix is an automated fully web application testing tool that is able to detect and
report to over 4500 web application vulnerabilities which includes all the variants of XSS and
SQL injection. The tool fully supports JavaScript, authenticated applications, allowing of
complex, and supports HTML 5.
Features of Acunetix web application testing tool
Deep-scan technology: This feature is an automated crawler that can crawl on complex
custom HTML5 websites and web applications. This also includes even client-side single-page
applications. Second with this tool, one has the ability of scanning websites with modern web
technologies; this includes Javascript frameworks such as Vue, ember, react and angular. Back-
end technologies such as Asp.net, PHP, Ruby on rails and java. Third, the tool has other features
such as custom authentication schemes, multi-factor authentication, and single sign-on
authentication. One advantage of the tool is that it provides interactive application testing
commonly known as IAST or what is known as gray box testing for java powered web
applications. Second, it enhances regular dynamic scan via deployment

2.1.1.4 TestingWhiz web application testing tool
This is one of the web application testing tool developed by Cygnet Infotech. The tool offers
automated solutions such as web testing, database testing, automation, optimization, and API
testing. Some of the features of this tool include are; Delivery in agile cycles, risk-based testing,
300 testing commands which also includes an in-built JavaScript, Playback test automation
framework, Object eye internal recorder: Allows the tester to archive and record web application
controls. It permits one to edit the stored objects through smart editing features, an integration
with test management tools such as HP Quality center, reusable methods, image comparison, and
dynamic test data support: This feature is used to reduce the maintenance of the automation
scripts and the test coverage, roust logs and reports, visual recorder, and captcha automation
Advantages
TestingWhiz tool is very easy to use for both large and small automation. The tool comes
with what software test engineers refer to as the FAST engine which utilizes intelligent and
reusable recording techniques; this includes data-driven, keyboard-driven and Ms –excel
programming. In addition, the tool allows one to create powerful and modular automation scripts
with ease. Also, the test commands applied by the tool are usable even to those users who have
no coding skills to optimize testing workloads and to boost the efficiency of the automation
projects. Also, the web application testing tool supports various browsers which are Firefox,
safari, android mobile browsers, and IE, Safari, IE, and Chrome. In addition, the engine executes
automation projects with inimitable flexibility, and speed since the tool has the ability to
implement various file formats which include DOS, .exe, and .bat file. Some of the
disadvantages are; the tool is not provided for free; it is subscription-based which is readily

available on request. Also, the tool do not have the ability to fully scan a web application like
Acunetix
Figure 5: TestingWhiz tool
2.1.1.5 HPE unified web application functional testing tool
This is a web application tool which provides users with interactive tools which is used
for executing and creating automated apps on web, mobile, and desktop platform. The tools are
used by software testers to allow users to execute and create automated functionality and
performance tests. In addition, the tool is specifically used to perform both regression and
functional testing via a user interface like a web interface or GUI.
Some of the features of the tool are; Manages exception handling, Supports data-driven
testing, extensibility, Complex UI objects, Extensibility, Automated documentation, Error
handling mechanism, Unique handling mechanism, and Integration with mercury quality center
and mercury business process testing. Some of the advantages of the tool support several

technologies but it depends on versions which are java, .net, SAP, Oracle, Siebel, Delphi, Power
Builder, and windows mobile. The tool has the ability to let software testers to edit and display
test codes that uses VBScript. Lastly, the tool is designed even for more advanced users where
they can edit all the test functions for the root Global actions. Some of the disadvantages of the
tool are; available as on-premise software for both windows but it is not readily available for
free; all the interested parties are required to contact HPE for licensing and pricing options; the
free platform which available do not have all the required features. Also, the tool runs only on
Windows environments and cannot test with all browsers versions and types; specifically the tool
supports only Opera. Third, there is no way one can run tests independently even though remote
execution is possible. The high licensing cost of the tool indicates that it can only be used on the
windows environment but it is limited to the smaller testing team. Lastly, the supports VB script
meaning that the tool lacks the ability to use some visual basic keywords. Also, the VB script
does not support inheritance and polymorphism.
2.1.1.6 Ranorex
Ranorex studio is one of the web application testing automation tool which covers all the
mobile, desktop and web applications. Some of the features of the tool are record and playback,
GUI recognition, reusable test code, and integration with the various tools
The tool delivers robust object recognition for any of the web technology thus making
web application testing reliable and resilient. The tool also has the ability to identify UI elements
with flexible and powerful RanoreXPath syntax that is capable of handling dynamic elements.
Third, the tool has the ability to support web frameworks and web technologies. The test hybrid
is based on open source chromium, embedded framework, and testing of JavaScript and Test
Java. Forth, the tool has the ability to perform what testers refer to as web element identification

thus making it possible to analyze web application and to apply predefined rules for stable
identification of elements. In addition, the tool integrates with the current solutions.
Ranorex
Figure 6: Ranorex tool
2.1.1.7 Selenium
Selenium is a web application tool that supports test automation. Selenium was first
discovered in 2004 by Huggins as an internal application at throughtWorks. The tool is
composed of several components which where each of the components has a specific role in
helping in the development of web applications. One of the important components is the

selenium IDE which is a complete IDE for selenium tests. Most of the Selenium Quality
Assurance engineers focus on two or one tools that the needs of their project. Some of the
features of the tool are; Supports android testing and iPhone, runs a little faster and even server is
not required, it is very easy for a Web Driver to build a keyword, and Selenium server
initializing is not required
Selenium advantages
Advantages of selenium, the test scripts can be written in any of the programming
languages like Python, c£, Perl, Java, and .net. Second selenium tests can be carried out in any if
the operating system, Linux, Mac, Windows. The tests can be carried out in Opera, Safari,
Mozilla Firefox, and google chrome. Forth, the tests can be carried out using JUnit and TestNG
for generating reports and managing test cases [17]. Some of the disadvantages of the tool are;
Test engineers can only use selenium to test web applications only; the test engineers can’t test
desktop-based applications or any other software. Second, when using selenium there is no
support available for selenium. Tests engineers are required to leverage the available customer
communities. Third, test engineers cannot test images; they need to integrate selenium with what
is known as Sikuli for image-based testing. Lastly, the tool does not offer a native reporting
facility.
2.1.1.8 JMeter
JMeter web application testing tool for both dynamic and static resources and web
dynamic applications. JMeter web application testing is used to simulate a heavy load on a
server, object or network, group or to analyze overall performance under load types. Some of the
features of the tool are; the ability to load and performance tests many different applications,
database through JDBC, LADAP, Message-oriented middleware, Mail SMTP, via JMS, Shell

scripts or native commands, Full features test IDE which allows fast test plan, a complete and
ready to present dynamic HTML report, and offers complete compatibility with java purity
2.1.1.9 TestComplete Web application tool
This is a web application testing tool that was developed by SmartBear Software. The
tool contains gives the designers or the testers the ability to create automated tests for iOS,
Android operating systems, and Microsoft. Usually, TestComplete contains three major modules
which are mobile, Web, and Desktop. Each of the modules contains its own functionality for
creating automated tests. Some of the features of this tool are; extensions and SDK, test
Visualizer: In here the tool has the ability to capture screenshots during test recording and
playback, open architecture, data-driven testing, bug tracking integration, scripted testing: This
feature shows that the tool has a built-in code which assists the tester to write scripts manually,
keyword testing, CPOM-based [18]. Some of the supported testing types by the tool are;
Keyword testing, Mobile application testing, manual testing, data-driven testing, regression
testing, GUI testing, distributed testing, load testing for web services, and unit testing
Some of the advantages of TestComplete are; Easy to use, it is reliable, it is fast, it saves
one time, it has a 24/7 supporting team, offers timely updates, trimming the cost of testing, and
easy continuous integration one disadvantage of the tool is that do not support MAC OS
2.1.1.10 Google Pagespeed Insight Web application tool
Google Page is one of the current web application tools from Google Inc. family. The
tool was designed to assist in website performance optimization. It was first introduced at a
developer conference in 2010. The tool has four main components for this tool which are
PageSpeed insights, PageSpeed Chrome, PageSpeed Module, and PageSpeed service. All the
components are there to identify website compliance faults. It is also used to automate the

adjustment process. Also the tool has the ability of measuring how a web page can improve its
performance on time to full page load, and time above the field load.
Some of the features of the tool are; combines heads: The tool has the ability to combine
several <head> tag into one tag this prevents browser workflow, removes comments: Has the
ability to delete HTML comments, trims URLs: The tool has the ability to substitute absolute
URLs with the relative ones, and local storage cache: These features saves inline resources.
Some of the advantages of the tool offer an improved user experience, it is an easy to use tool,
provides a very detailed report of its findings, includes additional languages besides English and
it is provided for free by Google. Some of the disadvantages of the tool is that it is not supposed
to be used by a professional developer, and the tool rules can be very difficult to interpret [19]
With Google Pagespeed one enters the web application link on the tool to test the
application. The look of the tool is as shown below
Figure 7: Google Pagespeed Insight

2.1.1.11 GTmetrix Web application tool
GTmetrix web application tool goes into detail as it checks both Yslow and Pagespeed
matrix. This means that compare with Google page insight tool, GTmetrix has the ability to
assign a website grade from F to A. Also the tool offers free registration, where one can test a
web application from around several different locations.
Some of the features of the tool are; the ability to carefully monitor pages and run its tests
weekly, daily, or monthly, the ability of visualizing performance with at least three graphs
available, annotate areas of interest, and Zooms, pans, and able to set a date range so as to find
specific performance history. Some of the advantages of the tool are; monitored analysis,
multiple test options, mobile analysis, alerts and digests, and page-load analysis. One of the
disadvantage of the tool is that it is not offered for free [20]
2.1.1.12 Pingdom Web application tool
Pingdom is a tool that offers availability for one website, web services, and web
applications. The tool uses more than seventy global polling stations to test and verify the
customer’s website. With the tool, one has the ability of monitoring web application
performance, uptime, and user experience. The tool has the ability to analyze one website load
and speed. Lastly, the tool is designed to assist a developer in making the site faster and offering
an in-depth insight into a web page speed and performance expectations with email notifications
or SMS.
Some of the features of the tool are offering uptime monitoring, offering real user
monitoring, offering page speed monitoring, offering Root Cause Analysis, and offers reliable
alerting. Some of the pros of the tool are; it is cost-effective, reliable, and uptime monitoring.

One con for the tool is that it is not offered for free it only 14 days day free trial with limited
features [21]
Figure 8: PingDom tool
2.2 Traditional web application methodologies
Different types of techniques have been employed in the past to test web applications. Some of
these methodologies are;
 Structural testing: This is data flow analysis on web applications which applied to web
applications to test if a web application is built dynamically
 Statistical testing: This is a type of web application whereby input sequence are generated
to test the interaction between a web application based on the profile use of a web
application

 Mutation testing: This is a methodology of introducing faulty code which is referred to as
mutants into the source code of the web application. This is done deliberately to
predetermine the points and testing of the web application so as one can uncover
unknown errors
 GUI interaction testing: This is a traditional web application testing whereby a web
application is tested for correctness. This is done by observing the state of web
application
 Hierarchical strategy: This is one of the high-level operational profile which is developed
by enumerating frequency of operations
 Combinatory interaction testing: this is another type of traditional testing whereby the
user uses combinations of the various techniques so as to first design a unique input space
matrix for the web application.
 Invariant based technique: This is a type of web application methodology used by
crawling web pages and formally designing the state of flow of graphs with all the
possible user interaction sequence
 Cross-browser compatibility testing: This is a traditional type of testing which is done
across various browsers for adherence to the expected results.
 Invariant based technique: this is a traditional type of web application testing which is
done by crawling of web pages and formally designing of a state flow graph with all the
possible user interaction sequences [22]

CHAPTER THREE
III. Methodology
3.1 Automated Software Testing tools
When application designers start researching on the best software tester tool, it is very
essential to first create a list of the most used software testing tools as it has been in chapter one.
If we do not have a list of the software testing tools, test engineers will be wasting a lot of time
downloading, evaluating, and installing testing tools that may only meet some of the
requirements. This research paper evaluates several tools and recommends one tool. Selenium
tool have been settled after a comparison of four major tools which are widely used for testing
web application these are Selenium, Quick Test Pro, Ranorex, and Test complete.
There more advantages of automated testing over manual testing, various organizations
are engaged in developing different automated testing tools. Specifically, there are two types of
test tools. These are open-source test tools and commercial test tools. The open test tools are free
for use such as selenium, QTP, and TC.
3.2 Archival research methodology
To conduct this research the researcher adopted archival research methodology. This
where data that already exists in other people's articles and to the developers of the web
application tool is used to evaluate the best web application testing tool. The types of data
available online are on the various web application tools, there features, advantages and
disadvantages.

3.2.1 Why use archival data
Most researchers prefer to use original data as they have more control over it but in this
case, web application testing tools information already exists. Second, with archival data, it will
be very easy and it will take less time to evaluate and process the data. Third, archival data
which already exists about web application tools have already been processed by statisticians.
Forth, by adopting the archival method the researcher will in a position to find out more than was
currently gathered about web application tools. Fifth, the researcher will be able to eliminate the
need to correct for issues or problems like improper sampling, and observer bias. Sixth with the
archival method, one can make it possible for small organizations with very limited resources to
conduct thorough evaluation studies.
The organizations likely to have this information are companies such as Phonosnack who
are involved in developing applications, academia who have done much research in web
application testing and dissertations for advanced degrees related to software testing, funded
research by web such engines like Google scholar [23].
Other reasons for using archival data
To better understand web application testing tools. This will be done by reviewing
articles; this one will get a clearer picture of software testing and help in interpreting any results
which may come on the way. Second, with the archival type of research methodology, the
researcher will be able to identify the best tool to use to test web applications along with a clear
picture of why it is best suited for use by test engineers. Also, the researcher will be able to
establish the baseline against which to measure results. Lastly, the researcher will be in a
position to measure the results of the study. Lastly, the researcher will be in a position to

establish a standard of comparison against which to measure the research effort; this can give a
sense of how serious the issue of web application is.
3.3 overview of comparison from archival research methodology [24]
Criteria for
testing
Ranorex Selenium Jmeter Test Complete
Record playback Support
playback and
record back
option
Support Support Support
Supporting
language
No specific
scripting
language is
used as it is
written in .NET
language using
C hash, Iron
python, and
VB.net
C hash,
Javascript, PHP,
Perl, Ruby, and
Python.
Javascript
VB script
C++, Java script,
and VB script
Platform Support SAP
.NET
Delphi
Java
C hash
Windows
Linux
Unix
MAC
MAC
Windows only Windows only

Desktop Testing
Browser support Firefox
Internet
Explorer
Chrome
All browsers Chrome
Firefox
Internet Explorer
All browsers
Data driven
framework
CSV
Excel
SQL
Excel-CSV Excel files
XML
DB files
Text files
Excel
CSV
SQL
Test result
generation
HTML HTML, XML HTML HTML

1V CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Test
Choosing the very best web application tool for testing is not an easy task. This usually
needs lots of consideration such as whether a certain tool has relived of the integration. In
addition, a testing tool has to be companionable with the execution and blueprint of the web
application as well. As discussed in chapter two there are various tools which are available in the
market and choose one of the tool is an intricate task [25].
4.1 Test scenario
All tools discussed in chapter two have a record feature. Usually, the tester needs to run a
web application where a login page is displayed. The tester then goes ahead to enter a password
and username and goes ahead to click the log in page. After a successful login page, a dashboard
is displayed with grid views that show sample data. The tester then goes ahead to click on the
person link in the major navigation panel that is located on the left screen. The tool the loads
what tester engineers refer to as person search and the tester engineer goes ahead to search any
data on the web application after clicking the search button. The page is then loaded. From the
view of chapter two, Sahi and selenium tools appears to be more reliable than other tools. In
addition, they appear to be more time saving and effective as compared to other tools. Running
tests and recording by using TestComplete appears to be weaker when dealing with dynamic web
applications.
Table two below shows a summary of a comparison of the four best web-application
Table 2: A summary of a comparison of the three best web-application tools
Tool ElementID XPath DOM Group of

elements
Selenium    
TestComplete   
JMeter    
Table 3 below shows a comparison in terms of technical support
Table 3: Technical Support services
Tool Articles Technical
personnel
Bug tracking Forums Documentation
Selenium   
TestComplete    
Sahi  
Selenium    
Vs Web Test     
4.3 Cross browser comparison
Samer (2013) has compared how several web application tools functions on some
browsers. His comparison was based on Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Google Chrome.
According to Samer, TestComplete seems to be less compatible with web browsers especially
Internet Explorer as compared to Sahi and selenium. This is because the TestComplete tool
seems to be using an engine to access the web application or the web pages that are based on
accessing Internet Explorer.

Table 4: Selenium comparison with other tools
Features IBM RFT Selenium HP QTP
License Required Open-source Required
Customer support Dedicated IBM
support
Open-source
community
Dedicated HP support
Environment support Only for windows Windows, Solaris OS
X (If browser & JVM
or JavaScript exists)
Only for Windows
Language support Java and C£ Java, Ruby,
Javascript, Python,
Perl
VB script
Coding experience Not required Ample amount of
coding skills and
experience needed
Not required
Hardware
consumption during
script execution
High Low High
cost High Open-source software High
Table four below gives a comparative study of the four tools presented in chapter two which are
selenium, Ranorex, TestIO, and Test Complete
Parameters Ranorex TestIO TestComplete Selenium

Cost Offered for free The tool is
provided as a
trial version for
free for only 30
days
The tool is
provided for free
The tool is
provided for free
Ease of use Require
programming
skills for the test
engineer to
customize
The tool is
flexible to use
and it can easily
be used for
regression and
functional
testing
The tool is very
easy to use. It
usually
empowers
someone to
connect to the
database, trade
XML records,
spreadsheets and
read documents
The requires the
tester to have
some
programming
skills to start the
process of
testing
Language
support
Supports
JavaScript
The tool support
VB script
The tool
supports BSD
library
The tool
supports several
languages which
are python,
JavaScript, Java,
PHP, C hash
Hardware
requirement
1.5 GB RAM is
required
The tool requires
Linux software
with the latest
The hardware
required for this
tool is 4x Dual-

version of Xcode
4.4
core AMD
opteron
Customization The tool is
highly
customized
The has the
ability to
customize
controls by using
what test
engineers refer
to as custom
proxy server
documentation
The tool has
already been
customized with
http requests to
the servers
The tool is
highly
customizable
and customized
defects reporti
Table 5: Comparison of the various types of web application tools [26]

V CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Results
A case study has been carried out by PhotoSnack on the best web application tool and it
is evident that Selenium is the best web application tool tester. The tool supports all the testing
activities of a web application tool listed by table five below’
Table 6: Web application testing activities
Testing activity Description
Security testing This an activity specifically planned to uncover imperfections in the
security components for data framework [27]
Usability testing This is a type of testing with a view of viewing clients’ perception of
the web application [28].
Compatibility testing This type of testing activity where the test engineer checks for the
compatibility of the web application
Performance testing Checks the viability of the web application
Stress stressing This type of testing activity assess the conduct of the web application
The report of performance testing by Photosnack shows that selenium outperformed lots of web
application tools example table six below shows performance

Table 7: Results for performance testing for selenium [29]
Test identifier Test case
description
Average Mean testing Time
One user Fifty users 100 users
Test 1 Query on upload
of photos
4.9 9.3 11.8
Test 2 Query rate
records
11 15 13
Test 4 Query about
sign-up
3.1 8.5 7.1
Test 4 Making a new
slide show
6 10 8
Test 5 Importing
pictures from
Facebook
13 24.4 31
Test 6 Importing
pictures from
Instagram
11.4 20 30
Test 7 Importing
pictures form
Flicker
3.8 5.8 7.5
Test 8 Saving
slideshow
8.7 9.0 29
Test 9 Query for 5.4 8.4 10.2

sharing
slideshow on
Flicker
Test 10 Query for
sharing
slideshow on
Instagram
5 9.3 11.7
Test 11 Query for
sharing
slideshow on
Facebook
3.7 8.6 9.4
Test 12 Query for
downloading
templates
5.3 7.6 6.7
Test 13 Query for
uploading videos
14 23 32
From the table above it is evident that PhotoSnack performed several steps in turn with
three client levels i.e, one user, fifty clients, and one hundred clients. PhotoSnack went ahead to
detail the performance testing of selenium web application software. As one can view from the
testing, the web application was very efficient when only one user was accessing it and when
performing a number of tasks on it. The average time as shown by figure 15 below is a minimum
case of one. When the number of clients are increased, the average mean time is increased as

well. It is moderate in the case of fifty users and doubled in the case of a hundred clients [30].
Therefore one can conclude that as the number of clients is increased, then the performance of
the application is reduced. But as far as the testing mechanism is concerned then selenium tool
proofs to be the best tool. It is best suited for testing web applications under peal conditions. The
tool can also be used to check errors in a web-application and the performance of the web
application [31].
Figure 9: A graph showing the average mean time for one, fifty, and one hundred users
Also From the previous sections, it is evident that testing plays a very important role in
both software development and web application development. Usually, web applications tend to
take faster and quicker release cycle thus making the process of web application testing very
challenging. The major issues which have been put across by various web application developers
are bug detection efficiency and cost-efficiency. Suguna and Rajya (2015) have given a review

of automated testing tools of testing supported by the tools led by a survey of some interesting
facts by the two authors available [32]
Table 8: A Comparison of the various web application testing tools
S/No Tool Type of
testing
supported
Browser
support
Language
supported
Licensed/
Open source
1 Ranorex Functional
testing
IE, Safari,
Firefox,
chrome
All Open-source
2 Selenium Functional
testing
IE, Safari,
Chrome,
Firefox
Java, .NET,
PHP, Perl, and
Ruby
Open-source
3 Acunetix Functional
testing
IE, Safari,
Chrome,
Firefox
VB script License
4 HPE Acceptance
Testing
N/A Java, python, c
hash
Open-source
5 Test
Compete
Functional
testing and
Unit testing
IE, Safari,
Chrome,
Firefox
VB script
JavaScript,
Delphi, C hash
Licensed
6 TestingWhiz Functional
testing
Integration
testing
N/A Java Open-source

Unit testing
End-end
testing
7 WEBLOAD Load testing IE, Chrome,
Firefox
HTTP/HTTPS
web-sockets,.
AJAX,
SOAP,HTML5,
and webDAV
Licensed
8 TestIO Security
testing
Any web
browser
C hash, ASP,
Java, .NET
Licensed
From all the tables provided on the comparison of the various tools, it means that there is
a need for indicating the health of web application testing tools. A plotting of the number of tools
vs the type of testing supported by each tool is supported by the figure below. From the figure, it
is evident that there not so many tools testing non-functional attributes of web applications such
as trustworthiness, fault tolerance, and reliability which are not readily available. Also, there is
the death of all open source tools which are using mutation techniques that can perform
automated test case execution which are based on mutation analysis while at the same time
optimizing the test suite.

Figure 10: Number of tools vs the type of testing
The no. of web application tools vs. open source or licensed has been plotted by the
figure shown below. The figure depicts the topmost tools which are available for web application
testing and which are commercial in nature
Figure 11: Number of open source tools vs. the licensed tool
5.1 Discussion
From chapter two it is evident that the automation tools have been there for several years.
In addition, web application testing tools work against web pages in an HTML format. Using the
web application tools, the test engineers have the ability to record a functional test and playback

if needed. There are various factors to consider when selecting a tool; first, a web application
tool needs to be reliable to have a playback feature especially when testing dynamic web
applications. The web application testing tool ought to execute the test during the test without
any errors. Second web application testing tools need to have the ability to export the resulting
tests as programmable scripts so that the test engineers are able to understand, refactor, and
maintain the modules. Third, a web application testing tool needs to be diverse; the diversity
provided by the tool helps in finding the elements on a web application especially the dynamic
applications. The fourth factor to consider when selecting a web application is the ability of the
tool to support cross-browser compatibility. Most of the web applications have a priority feature
supported by various browsers like Mozilla Firefox and Chrome. Forth, a web application needs
to be effective especially when it comes to waiting for the web application to load completely
before they start manipulating and accessing the web application elements. Lastly, test engineers
need to consider the technical support services of the web application testing tool. Most of the
web application has a technical documentation that has been provided by the respective vendors
but without the technical support when a need arises. This results in the technical team running
into problems or issues while using the automation tool yet the major reason for using a certain
web application testing tool is saving time and speed, the test engineers need not waste much
time in developing a solution which someone else already knows. The technical support services
besides technical documentation which need to be there are bug tracker systems, technical
support services, and forums [33].
6.0 Conclusion and recommendation
From this paper, it is evident that the web has a very significant impact on all features of
our society. As organizations and companies rely more on the web, web-application has become

increasingly more important. On the other hand, sophisticated attacks have grown which has
raised the need of coming up with web-applications that are secure and not prone to attacks. This
can only be achieved by using the best web-application testing tools to test the applications
before using the application.
Some of the limitations of this study are; first some of these tools are not provided for
free therefore the study could not offer a clear analysis of these tools from the demo which was
provided from the various sources. Second, the process of testing web application tools requires
time, one needs to create a web application or the webpage and test it using the various tools to
ascertain the said features. All tools done in this research never none of the tools offer four types
of testing which are simple static web site testing, dynamic web application testing, mobile
website testing, dynamic web application testing, and e-commerce website testing. This is one of
the future plans that developers need to think when coming up with the various tools. In addition,
developers need to have plans for GUI testing in web testing.

References
[1] ]. R. J. D. G. S. Gojarea, ""Analysis and Design of Selenium WebDriver Automation
Testing Framework," Science Direct, vol. III, no. 2, pp. 34-67, 2015.
[2] E. M. Antonia Bertolino, A Brief Essay on Software Testing, CA: Los Alamitos Press, n.d.
[3] P. Pohjolainen, "Web application testing tools," 2002.
[4] B. Erinle, Performance testing with Jmeter, Birmingham: Packt Publishing, 2013.
[5] S. S. K. a. G. R. Elbaum, "Improving web application testing with user session data,"
Software testing , vol. II, no. 2, pp. 49-59, 2016.
[6] T.-S. W. Din Jong 1, "Student Acceptance of Web-based Learning System," Software
Testing, vol. II, no. 3, pp. 533-535, 2009.
[7] V. Rufus, AngularJS Web Application Development Blueprints. by Vinci Rufus, Packt
Publishing, 2014.
[8] G. A. Di Lucca, "Testing web applications," International Conference on Software
Maintenance, 2002. Proceedings, vol. III, no. 2, pp. 13-47, 2013.
[9] V. Prasad, Software testing tools, New York: Random Publications, 2017.
[10] R. Patton, Software testing, New York: Sams Pub, 2013.
[11] B. B. C. S. E. Bermes, Search Engine Optimization All-in-One For Dummies, New York:

Springer Press, 2012.
[12] U. Gundecha, Selenium testing tools cookbook., New York: Packt Publishing, 2017.
[13] M. B. C. a. A. M. M. Xun Yuan, "GUI Interaction Testing: Incorporating Event Context,"
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 37, no. No.3, 2011.
[14] P. K. D. Yuan-FangLi, "Two decades of Web application testing—A survey of recent
advances," Information Systems, vol. 5, no. No.4, pp. 20-54, 0306-567, 2017.
[15] N. A. a. M. Vieira, "Penetration Testing for Web Services," Web application testing, vol.
IV, no. no.2, pp. 23-78, 2004.
[16] B. X. Z. C. J. J. H. C. Lei Xu, "Regression Testing for Web Applications Based on Slicing,"
Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Computer Software and Applications
Conference , vol. IV, no. no. 3, pp. 89-109, 2015.
[17] T. Janarthana, "Performance Evaluation and Comparison of Sahi Pro and Selenium
Webdriver," International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 129, no. 8, 2015.
[18] AlexSoft, "Comparing Automated Testing Tools: Selenium, TestComplete, Ranorex, and
more," AlexSoft Software and Engineering, 27th February 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.altexsoft.com/blog/engineering/comparing-automated-testing-tools-selenium-
testcomplete-ranorex-and-more/. [Accessed 1st July 2019].
[19] B. Batesole and E. E. S. S. J. S. R. F. Lynda.com, The art of SEO, Chicago: Springer Press,
2013.
[20] W. Li and C. J. Mitchell, Analysing the Security of Google’s Implementation of OpenID

Connect, New York: John & Wiley, 2015.
[21] G. G. H Kaur, Comparative study of automated testing tools: selenium, quick test
professional and testcomplete, Birmingham: Packt Publishing, 2012.
[22] C. Serrão, V. A. Díaz and F. Cerullo, Web application security : Iberic Web Application...
by Carlos Serrão, Berlin: Springer Press, 2014.
[23] J. C. Welman, F. Kruger and B. Mitchell, Research methodology, Oxford University Press,
2017.
[24] H. Fujita, New trends in software methodologies, tools and techniques, Amsterdam: IO
press, 2010.
[25] N. M. Y. a. R. M. Sherolwendy Anak Sualim, "Comparative Evaluation of Automated User
Acceptance Testing Tool for Web Based Application," International Journal of Software
Engineering and Technology, 2016.
[26] M. E. A. A. S. A. Hedayati, "Investigating into Automated Test Patterns in Erratic Tests by
Considering Complex Objects," Software Testing tools, vol. II, no. 3, pp. 13-67, 2015.
[27] M. M. E.-m. Mohamed Monier, "Evaluation of automated web testing tools," Software
Testing tools, vol. II, no. 2, pp. 13-67, 2014.
[28] M. B. J. F. P. Godefroid, "VeriWeb: Automatically testing dynamic web sites," n
Proceedings of 11th International World Wide Web Conference, vol. II, no. 3, pp. 45-78,
2013.
[29] M. M. S. M. R. Angmo, "Performance Evaluation of Web Based Automation Testing

Tools," Software testing tools, vol. III, no. 2, pp. 34-89, 2013.
[30] J. A. D. F. u. R. M. R. I. Altaf, "SURVEY ON SELENIUM TOOL IN SOFTWARE
TESTING," Software testing tool, vol. I, no. 2, pp. 56-89, 2015.
[31] G. A. M. E. F. C. A. C. D.-N. A. M. F. V. d. Castro, ""Extension of Selenium RC Tool to
Perform Automated Testing with Databases in Web Applications," Web application testing
tools, vol. II, no. 3, pp. 56-89, 2014.
[32] D. Menascé, "Enterprise Web Application Testing," Architecting High Performing,
Scalable and Available Enterprise Web Applications, pp. 179-198, 2015.
[33] S. Kundu, "Web Testing: Tool, Challenges and Methods," IJCSI International Journal of
Computer Science , vol. 9, no. No. 3, 2011.
[34] Bertolino, Software Testing: Future of Software Engineering, New York: John & Wiley
Press, 2014.
[35] A. H. a. M. Kellogg, "Automating Functional Tests Using Selenium," software testing
tools, vol. IV, no. 2, pp. 34-56, 2013.
[36] T. Parviainen, Real-time web application development with vert.x. by Tero Parviainen,
New York: Packt Publishing Limited, 2013.
[37] S. S. M. D. Rajya Lakshmi, "A Review on Web Application Testing and its Current
Research Directions," International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering
(IJECE) , vol. 4, no. No.2, pp. 2132-2141, 2017.
[38] D. K. Andrey Petukhov, "Web applicatiion testing vulnetabilities and attacks," Detecting

Security Vulnerabilities in Web Applications, pp. 2-14, 2016.
[39] Y. Singh, Software testing, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
[40] SerdarDoğan, "Web application testing: A systematic literature review," Web application
testing, vol. iv, no. no.4, pp. 34-90, 2013.