Selenium vs Playwright

Side-by-side — pricing, strengths, tradeoffs, and fit.

Selenium

Python bindings for Selenium WebDriver to automate web browsers.

Playwright

Headless Chromium, WebKit, and Firefox with a single API.

At a glance

Open SourceFree Tier
◌ Declining·From $0
Open SourceFree Tier
● Established·From $0

Overview

One-liner

Python bindings for Selenium WebDriver to automate web browsers.

One-liner

Headless Chromium, WebKit, and Firefox with a single API.

Maturity

Declining

Maturity

Established

Open source

✓ Yes

Open source

✓ Yes

Pricing

Free tier

✓ Available

Open source — free to use

Free tier

✓ Available

Open source — free to use

Starts at

$0

Starts at

$0

Model

Flat rate

Model

Flat rate

Enterprise

✕ None

Enterprise

✕ None

Best for

✓ Best for

Developers who need to automate browser actions across multiple platforms and browsers.
Test teams looking to ensure cross-browser compatibility of web applications.

✓ Best for

Teams needing cross-browser compatibility in their automated tests.
Developers who require a single API to automate multiple browsers.

Not ideal for

✕ Not for

Projects that require real-time interaction with the browser, as Selenium is more suited for batch processing tasks.
Scenarios where performance is critical, as Selenium can be slower compared to headless browser solutions.

✕ Not for

Projects that need real-time interaction with the browser (Playwright is more suited for batch processing).
Users requiring cloud-based automation services without local setup.

Strengths

↑ Strengths

Automate web browsers across multiple platforms and languages.
Support for a wide range of browsers including Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge.
Integration with testing frameworks like pytest and unittest.

↑ Strengths

Supports multiple browsers (Chromium, WebKit, Firefox) with a single API.
Automates web pages in headless and headed mode.
Provides built-in support for browser contexts and page navigation.

Weaknesses

↓ Weaknesses

Performance overhead due to browser automation
Complex setup for grid and distributed testing
Limited support for mobile browser automation

↓ Weaknesses

Steep learning curve for non-TypeScript developers
Frequent breaking changes between versions
Limited built-in support for certain browser-specific features
Performance overhead in headful mode
Full Selenium profile →Full Playwright profile →