Cypressย vsย Enzymeย vsย Mocha

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

Cypress

1.1K
1.3K
+ 1
88
Enzyme

453
316
+ 1
0
Mocha

3.5K
2.5K
+ 1
425
Advice on Cypress, Enzyme, and Mocha
Yildiz Dila
testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice ยท | 5 upvotes ยท 99.7K views
Needs advice
on
Protractor
and
Cypress

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. ยท | 3 upvotes ยท 23.8K 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 ยท | 1 upvotes ยท 52.7K views
Recommends

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

https://github.com/newlifewj/handow

http://demo.shm.handow.org/reports

See more
Decisions about Cypress, Enzyme, and Mocha
Shared insights
on
Jest
Cypress

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

Postman will be used to do integration testing with the backend API we create. It offers a clean interface to create many requests, and you can even organize these requests into collections. It helps to test the backend API first to make sure it's working before using it in the front-end. Jest can also be used for testing and is already embedded into React. Not only does it offer unit testing support in javascript, it can also do snapshot testing for the front-end to make sure components are rendering correctly. Enzyme is complementary to Jest and offers more functions such as shallow rendering. UnitTest will be used for Python testing as it is simple, has a lot of functionality and already built in with python. Sentry will be used for keeping track of errors as it is also easily integratable with Heroku because they offer it as an add-on. LogDNA will be used for tracking logs which are not errors and is also a Heroku add-on. Its good to have a separate service to record logs, monitor, track and even fix errors in real-time so our application can run more smoothly.

See more

We use Mocha for our FDA verification testing. It's integrated into Meteor, our upstream web application framework. We like how battle tested it is, its' syntax, its' options of reporters, and countless other features. Most everybody can agree on mocha, and that gets us half-way through our FDA verification and validation (V&V) testing strategy.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using Private StackShare. Sign up for Private StackShare.
Learn More
Pros of Cypress
Pros of Enzyme
Pros of Mocha
  • 22
    Open source
  • 16
    Great documentation
  • 15
    Fast
  • 14
    Simple usage
  • 9
    Cross Browser testing
  • 8
    Easy us with CI
  • 4
    Npm install cypress only
    Be the first to leave a pro
    • 136
      Open source
    • 100
      Simple
    • 81
      Promise support
    • 48
      Flexible
    • 28
      Easy to add support for Generators
    • 12
      For browser and server testing
    • 7
      Curstom assertion libraries
    • 4
      Works with Karma
    • 3
      No other better tools
    • 1
      Simple integration testing
    • 1
      Default reporter is nice, clean, and itemized
    • 1
      Simple setup
    • 1
      Works with saucelabs
    • 1
      Lots of tutorials and help online
    • 1
      Works with BrowserStack

    Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

    Cons of Cypress
    Cons of Enzyme
    Cons of Mocha
    • 16
      Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing
    • 11
      Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support
    • 10
      No iFrame support
    • 8
      No xPath support
    • 8
      No file upload support
    • 8
      No page object support
    • 8
      No multiple domain support
    • 7
      Cypress doesn't support native app
    • 7
      No support for multiple tab control
    • 7
      Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet
    • 6
      No support for Safari
    • 6
      No support for multiple browser control
    • 4
      $20/user/thread for reports
    • 4
      Adobe
    • 4
      Not freeware
    • 3
      Using a non-standard automation protocol
    • 3
      No 'WD wire protocol' support
      Be the first to leave a con
      • 3
        Cannot test a promisified functions without assertion
      • 1
        Not as many reporter options as Jest
      • 1
        No assertion count in results

      Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

      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.

      What is Enzyme?

      Enzyme is a JavaScript Testing utility for React that makes it easier to assert, manipulate, and traverse your React Components' output.

      What is Mocha?

      Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases.

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

      What companies use Cypress?
      What companies use Enzyme?
      What companies use Mocha?

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

      What tools integrate with Cypress?
      What tools integrate with Enzyme?
      What tools integrate with Mocha?

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

      Blog Posts

      +29
      15
      11070
      +33
      20
      1618
      What are some alternatives to Cypress, Enzyme, and Mocha?
      Selenium
      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.
      TestCafe
      It is a pure node.js end-to-end solution for testing web apps. It takes care of all the stages: starting browsers, running tests, gathering test results and generating reports.
      Puppeteer
      Puppeteer is a Node library which provides a high-level API to control headless Chrome over the DevTools Protocol. It can also be configured to use full (non-headless) Chrome.
      WebdriverIO
      WebdriverIO lets you control a browser or a mobile application with just a few lines of code. Your test code will look simple, concise and easy to read.
      Jest
      Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.
      See all alternatives
      How developers use Cypress, Enzyme, and Mocha
      Kang Hyeon Ku uses
      Mocha

      javascript ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์จ๋ณธ ํ”„๋ ˆ์ž„์›Œํฌ ์ด๋‹ค. ์ดˆ๋ฐ˜ ์œ ๋ช…ํ•œ ํ”„๋ ˆ์ž„์›Œํฌ์ค‘ ํ•˜๋‚˜์˜€๋Š”๋ฐ ์š”์ฆ˜์€ ๋„ˆ๋ฌด ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ ํ”„๋ ˆ์ž„์›Œํฌ๋„ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•ด์ ธ ์ž˜ ๋ชจ๋ฅด๊ฒ ๋‹ค. junit ์—๊ฒŒ๋Š” hamcrest ์ด ์žˆ๋‹ค๋ฉด mocha ์—๊ฒŒ๋Š” chai๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค.

      Dave Woolfenden uses
      Mocha

      Is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on Node.js and in the browser supporting asynchronous testing.

      Cypress.io uses
      Cypress

      Test frontend behavior, requests to API endpoints, and assertions on JSON schemas for fixtures

      Kingsley Victor uses
      Mocha

      Mocha is ideal for running tests on apis built with Node's Express

      Tim De Lange uses
      Mocha

      Unit testing on shared code between brow ser and back end.

      toby lin uses
      Enzyme

      learn it in react-boilerplate. so much to learn

      Coolfront Technologies uses
      Mocha

      Testing for our Coolfront Mobile product

      Dave Woolfenden uses
      Enzyme

      Designed to work with Mocha