In this post, we will understand the difference between manual and automated testing −
It uses automation tools to execute the test cases.
It is fast in comparison to a manual approach.
It doesn’t allow random testing to be performed.
The initial investment is high.
The return on investment is better in the long run.
It is reliable.
It is performed by tools and scripts.
There is no testing fatigue in it.
Even for a trivial change, automated test scripts have to be modified.
It is expensive.
All the stakeholders can login to the automation system and check the results of execution.
It doesn’t involve human; hence it can’t assure being user-friendly or providing a positive customer experience.
Performance tests such as Load Testing, Stress Testing, Spike Testing have to be tested by an automation tool necessarily.
It can be done on different operating platforms in parallel.
It reduces the test execution time if done in parallel.
Multiple test scripts can be grouped together in a batch.
Programming knowledge is required in automation testing.
It requires a less complex test set up.
It is useful when executing the same set of test cases.
It is useful when working with Build Verification Testing (BVT).
It has zero risks on missing out of a pre-decided test.
It uses frameworks such as Data Drive, Keyword, Hybrid to improve the speed of automation process.
These tests behave like a document and give training value for automated unit test cases.
A new developer can see these unit test cases and understand the code base quickly.
They are done to enforce Test Driven Development (TDD).
It is an important part of DevOps Cycle.
It is best suited with Regression Testing, Performance Testing, Load Testing or highly repeatable functional test cases.
The test cases are executed by humans and software.
It is time-consuming.
It uses the human resources.
Exploratory testing can be done using manual testing.
The initial investment is less in comparison to automation testing.
The return on investment is lower in comparison to automation testing.
It is not accurate because it may cause human errors.
Minor changes such as id, class wouldn’t hinder execution of a manual tester.
Investment is required for the human resources.
It is not cost effective.
The manual tests are recorded in Excel or Word document.
The test results are not readily available.
It allows human observation; hence it may be user-friendly.
It is not feasible.
They can be done in parallel but more human resources would be required which would be expensive.
It can’t be in batches.
There is no need to have programming knowledge.
It requires a straightforward test execution setup.
It can be boring and error prone.
It is useful when the test case is required to be run once or twice.
It is difficult to execute the Build Verification Testing (BVT).
It is also time-consuming.
There is a higher risk of missing out on the pre-decided deadline.
It doesn’t use any framework.
They may use guidelines, checklists, stringent processes to draft specific test cases.
They provide no training value.
They don’t enforce test driven development.
It can be used with Exploratory, Usability and Adhoc Testing.
It can be used where the AUT changes frequently.