Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!


+ 1

+ 1
Add tool

Codeception vs Cypress: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Codeception and Cypress

Codeception and Cypress are both popular automation testing frameworks used for web applications. However, there are several key differences between the two:

  1. Installation and Setup: Codeception requires a complex installation process, with the need to configure various dependencies and modules. On the other hand, Cypress has a simple installation process, where you only need to install the Cypress package using npm or yarn.

  2. Syntax and Test Writing: Codeception uses the PHP programming language for writing tests, allowing developers to leverage their PHP knowledge and libraries. In contrast, Cypress uses JavaScript, making it more accessible for developers who are proficient in JavaScript.

  3. Architecture: Codeception follows a modular architecture, with separate modules for acceptance, functional, and unit testing. This allows for better organization and separation of concerns. In contrast, Cypress follows a single-page application (SPA) architecture, where all the testing resources are loaded into the browser, providing a consistent and seamless experience.

  4. Testing Capabilities: Codeception supports different types of testing like acceptance, functional, and unit testing, making it suitable for testing multiple layers of an application. On the other hand, Cypress is primarily focused on end-to-end testing, providing a rich set of APIs and features specifically designed for this type of testing.

  5. User Interface and Reporting: Codeception provides a graphical user interface (GUI) for viewing test results and generating reports, making it easy to analyze and track test executions. Cypress, on the other hand, provides a command-line interface (CLI) and a built-in dashboard for viewing test runs and test results, allowing for easy integration with CI/CD pipelines.

  6. Cross-Browser Testing: Codeception supports cross-browser testing through Selenium WebDriver, making it compatible with multiple browsers. Cypress, on the other hand, does not support cross-browser testing out of the box, as it is primarily focused on testing in a single browser (Chrome) for consistent and reliable results.

**In Summary, Codeception and Cypress differ in terms of installation and setup, syntax and test writing, architecture, testing capabilities, user interface and reporting, and cross-browser testing capabilities. These differences make them suitable for different testing scenarios and requirements.

Advice on Codeception and Cypress
Yildiz Dila
testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice | 5 upvotes 路 264K views
Needs advice

In the company I will be building test automation framework and my new company develops apps mainly using AngularJS/TypeScript. I was planning to build Protractor-Jasmine framework but a friend of mine told me about Cypress and heard that its users are very satisfied with it. I am trying to understand the capabilities of Cypress and as the final goal to differentiate these two tools. Can anyone advice me on this in a nutshell pls...

See more
Replies (2)
Kevin Emery
QE Systems Engineer at Discovery, Inc. | 4 upvotes 路 162K views

I've used both Protractor and Cypress extensively. Cypress is the easier and more reliable tool, whereas Protractor is the more powerful tool. Your choice of tool should depend on your specific testing needs. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each tool:

Cypress advantages:

  • Faster

  • More reliable (tends to throw fewer intermittent false failures)

  • Easier to read code (handles promises gracefully)

Cypress disadvantages:

  • Cannot switch between browser tabs

  • Cannot switch to iFrames

  • Cannot specify clicks or keypresses explicitly as if a real user was interacting

  • Cannot move the mouse to specific co-ordinates

  • Sometimes has trouble switching between different top-level domains, so not good for testing external links

  • Cypress is a newer tool with less extensive documentation and less community support

Protractor advantages:

  • More powerful because it is Selenium-based - it can switch between tabs, it can handle external links to other domains, it can handle iFrames, simulate keypresses and clicks, and move the mouse to specific co-ordinates within the browser.

  • More extensive community support and documentation

Protractor disadvantages:

  • Slower and more brittle - in general there is a higher likelihood of cryptic and/or intermittent errors which may cause your tests to fail even though there is nothing wrong with your application

  • For highly experienced automation engineers, the fundamental "brittle" nature of Selenium can be worked around - it can be reliable but only if you really know what you are doing

  • Less graceful handling of promises - relies on async/await or .then to manage the order of execution. Therefore it is a bit harder to read the code.

  • Harder to set up, and the method of setup impacts its reliability. For example, a hub/node configuration where the selenium jar is on a different physical machine than the browser under test will cause unreliability in your tests. Not everyone knows about this type of thing, so it's common to find Selenium frameworks that are set up poorly.

It's probably better to use Cypress if

  • you're at a smaller company and have a close relationship with developers who can help write hooks or stubs in their code to assist your testing

  • you don't need to do things like switch between tabs or test links to external top-level domains

It's probably better to use Protractor if

  • You might need to switch between tabs or test external links to other domains within the scope of your framework

  • You want to use a more accurate simulation of how a real user interacts with a browser (i.e. click at this location, type these keys)

  • You're at a company where you won't have any support from developers in writing hooks or stubs to make their code more testable in a less powerful framework like Cypress

See more
Jian Wang
Web Engineer at sentaca | 1 upvotes 路 190.9K views

Please try Handow, the e2e tool basing on Puppeteer.

Gherkin syntax compatible

Chrome/Chromium orentied, driven by Puppeteer engine

Complete JavaScript programming

Create test suites rapidly without coding (or a little bit), basing on built-in steps library

Schedule test with plans and arrange stories with sequential stages

Fast running, execute story groups in parallel by multi-workers

Built-in single page report render

Cover page view, REST API and cookies test

See more
Decisions about Codeception and Cypress
Shared insights

As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of Codeception
Pros of Cypress
  • 4
    Easy to get up and running some simple tests
  • 29
    Open source
  • 22
    Great documentation
  • 20
    Simple usage
  • 18
  • 10
    Cross Browser testing
  • 9
    Easy us with CI
  • 5
    Npm install cypress only
  • 2
    Good for beginner automation engineers

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Codeception
Cons of Cypress
    Be the first to leave a con
    • 21
      Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing
    • 14
      Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support
    • 12
      No iFrame support
    • 9
      No page object support
    • 9
      No multiple domain support
    • 8
      No file upload support
    • 8
      No support for multiple tab control
    • 8
      No xPath support
    • 7
      No support for Safari
    • 7
      Cypress doesn't support native app
    • 7
      Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet
    • 7
      No support for multiple browser control
    • 5
      $20/user/thread for reports
    • 4
    • 4
      Using a non-standard automation protocol
    • 4
      Not freeware
    • 3
      No 'WD wire protocol' support

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    - No public GitHub repository available -

    What is Codeception?

    Full-stack testing framework for PHP. Run browsers tests, framework tests, APIs tests, unit tests with ease.

    What is Cypress?

    Cypress is a front end automated testing application created for the modern web. Cypress is built on a new architecture and runs in the same run-loop as the application being tested. As a result Cypress provides better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser. Cypress works on any front-end framework or website.

    Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

    What companies use Codeception?
    What companies use Cypress?
    See which teams inside your own company are using Codeception or Cypress.
    Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn More

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with Codeception?
    What tools integrate with Cypress?

    Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

    Blog Posts

    What are some alternatives to Codeception and Cypress?
    Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well.
    PHPUnit is a programmer-oriented testing framework for PHP. It is an instance of the xUnit architecture for unit testing frameworks.
    It is an open source Behavior-Driven Development framework for PHP. It is a tool to support you in delivering software that matters through continuous communication, deliberate discovery and test-automation.
    It is a modern end to end testing framework with a special BDD-style syntax. The test is written as a linear scenario of user's action on a site. Each test is described inside a Scenario function with I object passed into it.
    Cucumber is a tool that supports Behaviour-Driven Development (BDD) - a software development process that aims to enhance software quality and reduce maintenance costs.
    See all alternatives