Difference Between Manual and Automated Testing

In this post, we will understand the difference between manual and automated testing −

Automation 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.

Manual Testing

• 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.