A Comprehensive Comparison of Cypress and Playwright

Automated testing has become an integral part of software development, ensuring that code works as intended and minimizing the risk of introducing bugs into the production environment. There are several test automation tools available, each with its own unique features and advantages. In this article, we will compare two popular test automation tools: Cypress and Playwright.

Cypress is a JavaScript-based end-to-end testing framework that is designed to simplify the process of writing, running, and debugging tests for web applications. Playwright, on the other hand, is a Node.js library for automating web browsers that provides a simple and intuitive API for browser automation.

Let's take a look at some code examples from both Cypress and Playwright to see how they compare.

Here is an example of a Cypress test that navigates to a URL and asserts that the page contains a specific element:

describe('My First Cypress Test', () => {
? it('Visits the Google Homepage', () => {
? ? cy.visit('https://www.google.com')
? ? cy.contains('Google Search')
? })
})        

Here is an example of a Playwright test that performs the same action as the Cypress test above:

const { chromium } = require('playwright')


(async () => {
? const browser = await chromium.launch()
? const context = await browser.newContext()
? const page = await context.newPage()


? await page.goto('https://www.google.com')
? await page.waitForSelector('input[name="q"]')
??
? const pageTitle = await page.title()
? expect(pageTitle).toContain('Google')
??
? await browser.close()
})()        

Both Cypress and Playwright have their own set of pros and cons.

Cypress Pros:

• Cypress provides a simple and intuitive API for writing end-to-end tests.
• Cypress runs tests in a browser and allows you to see what is happening in real-time.
• Cypress automatically reloads the page and waits for assertions to pass.

Cypress Cons:

• Cypress only supports Chromium-based browsers.
• Cypress can be slower to execute tests than Playwright.
• Cypress can be more difficult to set up and configure than Playwright.

Playwright Pros:

• Playwright provides a simple and intuitive API for browser automation.
• Playwright supports multiple browsers, including Chromium, Firefox, and WebKit.
• Playwright can be faster to execute tests than Cypress.

Playwright Cons:

• Playwright does not provide a built-in assertion library.
• Playwright can be more complex to set up than Cypress.
• Playwright requires a separate test runner, such as Jest or Mocha.

To get the most out of both Cypress and Playwright, it's important to follow some best practices.

Cypress Best Practices:

• Use the built-in cy.wait() function sparingly, as it can slow down test execution.
• Use custom Cypress commands to simplify test code and make it more readable.
• Use cy.fixture() to load test data from external files.

Playwright Best Practices:

• Use the page.waitForSelector() function to wait for page elements to load before interacting with them.
• Use expect() assertions to verify expected outcomes of tests.
• Use the --headed option when running tests locally to view the browser window during test execution.

Both Cypress and Playwright are powerful test automation tools that can simplify the process of writing, running, and debugging tests for web applications. Cypress provides a simple and intuitive API for writing end-to-end tests, while Playwright focuses on cross-browser coverage.