StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Testing Frameworks
  4. Browser Testing
  5. Enzyme vs Karma

Enzyme vs Karma

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Karma
Karma
Stacks4.8K
Followers603
Votes181
GitHub Stars12.0K
Forks1.7K
Enzyme
Enzyme
Stacks1.7K
Followers349
Votes0

Enzyme vs Karma: What are the differences?

Introduction

This Markdown code provides a comparison between Enzyme and Karma, focusing on the key differences between them.

  1. Scoping and Purpose: Enzyme is a JavaScript testing utility that primarily focuses on testing React components. It provides a simple and intuitive API for traversing, manipulating, and asserting React components. On the other hand, Karma is a test runner for JavaScript that allows you to execute tests in various real browsers, providing a real development experience.

  2. Setup and Configuration: Enzyme does not require any specific setup or configuration. It can be easily integrated with testing frameworks like Jest or Mocha. In contrast, Karma requires initial configuration with a karma.conf.js file where you define the testing frameworks, reporters, and browsers to be used.

  3. Testing Levels: Enzyme mainly focuses on component-level testing, allowing you to test the rendering, interaction, and state handling of individual React components. It provides shallow rendering, full rendering, and static rendering capabilities. On the other hand, Karma is typically used for end-to-end and integration testing, where it executes tests in real browsers and simulates user interactions.

  4. Test Environments: Enzyme provides a simulated and isolated test environment for React components, allowing you to test them without the need for a real browser. It uses JSDOM, a headless browser environment, to render and manipulate React components. On the other hand, Karma executes tests in real browsers, allowing you to test your application in different browser environments, ensuring cross-browser compatibility.

  5. Development Workflow: Enzyme is commonly used during the development phase of a React application. It allows developers to write tests alongside their code, facilitating a test-driven development approach. Karma is typically used during the continuous integration and deployment phase, as it helps ensure the overall stability and compatibility of the application in different browser environments.

  6. Integration with Test Runners: Enzyme integrates seamlessly with popular JavaScript test runners like Jest, Mocha, and Chai. It provides a set of helper functions and matchers specific to React components. On the other hand, Karma is a test runner itself and can be integrated with other testing frameworks like Jasmine, Mocha, or QUnit.

In summary, Enzyme is primarily focused on React components testing in a simulated environment, while Karma is a test runner that executes tests in real browsers, providing a more comprehensive testing experience.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Karma, Enzyme

Anonymous
Anonymous

Feb 6, 2020

Needs advice

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.

290k views290k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Karma
Karma
Enzyme
Enzyme

Karma is not a testing framework, nor an assertion library. Karma just launches a HTTP server, and generates the test runner HTML file you probably already know from your favourite testing framework. So for testing purposes you can use pretty much anything you like.

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

Test on Real Devices;Remote Control;Testing Framework Agnostic;Open Source;Easy Debugging;Continuous Integration
Shallow rendering; Full DOM rendering; Static rendered markup; React Hooks support
Statistics
GitHub Stars
12.0K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
1.7K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
4.8K
Stacks
1.7K
Followers
603
Followers
349
Votes
181
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 61
    Test Runner
  • 35
    Open source
  • 27
    Continuous Integration
  • 22
    Great for running tests
  • 18
    Test on Real Devices
Cons
  • 1
    Requires the use of hacks to find tests dynamically
  • 1
    Slow, because tests are run in a real browser
No community feedback yet
Integrations
Jasmine
Jasmine
Mocha
Mocha
React
React

What are some alternatives to Karma, Enzyme?

BrowserStack

BrowserStack

BrowserStack is the leading test platform built for developers & QAs to expand test coverage, scale & optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability.

Selenium

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.

Sauce Labs

Sauce Labs

Cloud-based automated testing platform enables developers and QEs to perform functional, JavaScript unit, and manual tests with Selenium or Appium on web and mobile apps. Videos and screenshots for easy debugging. Secure and CI-ready.

Mocha

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.

LambdaTest

LambdaTest

LambdaTest platform provides secure, scalable and insightful test orchestration for website, and mobile app testing. Customers at different points in their DevOps lifecycle can leverage Automation and/or Manual testing on LambdaTest.

Jasmine

Jasmine

Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run.

Jest

Jest

Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

Cypress

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.

Playwright

Playwright

It is a Node library to automate the Chromium, WebKit and Firefox browsers with a single API. It enables cross-browser web automation that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast.

Rainforest QA

Rainforest QA

Rainforest gives you the reliability of a QA team and the speed of automation, without the hassle of managing a team or the pain of writing automated tests.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana