shouldiuse.io

Categories

VERDICT

Should I use Applitools?

AI-powered visual testing and end-to-end test automation platform (flagship product: Applitools Eyes) - applitools.com

Depends. Buy if you run automated UI tests at scale and visual regressions hurt — it's the benchmark every competitor compares against. Small teams without existing test automation should use Percy, Argos, or Playwright's built-in screenshot diffs instead.

Confidence

Medium. Based on 14 public sources (reviews, security advisories, pricing comparisons, funding news); many snippets were truncated.

Ratings

  • Value for money
  • Ease of useNo specific usability evidence in sources
  • Feature depth
  • Support qualityNo direct support evidence in sources
  • Security posture

Pricing

Quote-based

Tiered plans

ModelNot disclosed
Monthly feesNot disclosed
HardwareNot disclosed

Best for

  • Enterprise QA teams running Selenium/Playwright suites
  • Large apps with complex, frequently changing UIs
  • Pixel-accurate visual regression across browsers
  • Regulated orgs requiring SOC 2 vendors

Not for

  • Small teams without existing automated UI tests
  • Anyone wanting transparent, self-serve pricing
  • Hobby projects — open-source diff tools cover this
  • Simple sites where free Playwright screenshots suffice

Gotchas - check before you buy

high

Quote-based pricing scales with checkpoints; heavy visual testing gets expensive fast

medium

Priced by test units — costs spike with team size and build frequency

medium

Three 2025 CVEs hit the Jenkins Eyes plugin (incl. stored XSS); patch promptly

medium

Guess: baselines live in Applitools' cloud; migrating snapshots to another tool is painful

Pros and cons

Pros

  • De facto category benchmark; every competitor compares against it
  • Users consistently praise it across 88+ G2 reviews
  • SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR compliant
  • Stable vendor: $250M Thoma Bravo acquisition, $31M raised
  • Deep CI/CD integrations: Jenkins, GitHub, AWS Marketplace

Cons

  • Opaque, quote-based pricing with no public plans
  • Buyers report costs vary widely and unpredictably
  • Middling 3.8/5 aggregate across 148 reviews
  • Jenkins plugin shipped multiple 2025 CVEs

Sources & method

Analyzed 10/03/2026 - 14 sources - SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR certified; 2025 CVEs affected the Jenkins integration plugin, not the core service.

official x1review x7security x3news x3
  • CVE-2025-53658 — Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin XSS, Stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in the Jenkins plugin.
  • CVE-2025-53743 — Jenkins plugin vulnerability, Rated medium severity; affects the Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin.
  • CVE-2025-53742 — multiple Jenkins plugin vulnerabilities, Multiple vulnerabilities disclosed in the Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin.

Key stats

  • Value for money: 2/5

    Rating

  • Quote-based

    Starting price

  • 14

    Sources

  • Analyzed

  • Value for money: 2/5. Opaque quote-based pricing; users report high, variable costs
  • Ease of use. No specific usability evidence in sources
  • Feature depth: 4/5. Category benchmark; visual AI plus broad CI/CD coverage
  • Support quality. No direct support evidence in sources
  • Security posture: 4/5. SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001; only plugin-level CVEs found
  • 3.8/5 Aggregate rating 148 reviews (RFP.wiki)
  • 88–90 G2 reviews across product and seller pages
  • $250M Acquired for Thoma Bravo, 2021
  • $31M Latest round raised 2022

Pricing

Tiered plans

Quote-based

  • Priced by test units/checkpoints
  • Enterprise plans negotiated via sales

Security

SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR certified; 2025 CVEs affected the Jenkins integration plugin, not the core service.

  • CVE-2025-53658 — Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin XSSStored cross-site scripting vulnerability in the Jenkins plugin.
  • CVE-2025-53743 — Jenkins plugin vulnerabilityRated medium severity; affects the Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin.12
  • CVE-2025-53742 — multiple Jenkins plugin vulnerabilitiesMultiple vulnerabilities disclosed in the Jenkins Applitools Eyes plugin.

What users say

Reviewers praise the visual-AI accuracy and time savings but repeatedly flag opaque, usage-based pricing.

“I notice prices can vary”
Reddit, r/Frontend

Alternatives

Compare Applitools with each alternative.

  • Percy

    BrowserStack's visual testing; simpler, published pricing

  • Argos

    Open-source-friendly visual testing with transparent pricing

    Applitools vs Argos
  • Meticulous

    Records and replays sessions; different visual-regression approach

  • Playwright screenshot tests

    Free built-in screenshot diffs; enough for many small teams

Full analysis

Based on 14 public sources (reviews, security advisories, pricing comparisons, funding news); many snippets were truncated.

Category-leading visual AI testing. Strong for enterprise QA; pricey and opaque for small teams without automated tests.

Methodology

Based on 14 public sources (reviews, security advisories, pricing comparisons, funding news); many snippets were truncated.

Sources

  1. review
  2. review
  3. review
  4. review
  5. review
  6. review
  7. review
  8. news
  9. official
  10. security
  11. security
  12. security
  13. news
  14. news

Rate this review

Anonymous. You can change your vote.

Loading votes…

Comments

One queue. No nested comments. Give a display name first. Limit: 200 words per comment and 7 comments per day. You can edit or delete yours.

Save a name to write a comment.

0 / 200 words

No comments yet.