Manual vs. Automated Testing: Which One is Best for You?

By Prometteur solutions 17 Min Read

Testing is an essential part of the software development life cycle and is used to ensure that the product meets its requirements. The choice between human and automated testing is frequently perplexing. Before delving further, let us quickly just add that Manual vs automated testing can be analyzed based on their advantages and disadvantages. 

However, while manual testing is still widely used, automated testing has become increasingly popular in recent years due to its ability to quickly and efficiently test a large number of scenarios.

When choosing between manual and automated testing, it’s important to consider the use case and the time/cost associated with each. For example, if a project requires a large number of tests, then automated testing may be more cost-effective in the long run. On the other hand, manual testing may be better suited for projects that require more complex scenarios or require frequent changes.

Explore The Ultimate Guide to Manual Web Application Testing: A Step-by-Step Manual Approach

Manual vs automated testing Comparison

We would love to give you a deeper understanding with a Manual vs automated testing comparison in this section.

Manual testing is performed by human testers, unlike the automated testing that is usually done by automated testing tools. The target of manual testers is to ensure that the software being testers functions as designed and will meet the user requirements. Depending on the testing goal, manual testing can be done by the testers or by the end users. Manual testing takes more time than automated testing but the end result is usually good enough to make improvements. 

On the other hand, automated testing is an advanced type of software testing whereby the testing activities are fully automated with the aim of improving the product’s quality by either identifying errors, or identifying and helping to address those errors. Automated testing is best performed on a regular basis to avoid errors and consequences that may be damaging to the product.

When you do automated testing, you can also always detect existing bugs or regressions in existing code. Unlike manual testing, automated testing uses automation testing tools to eliminate the need for human input in testing which can be very time consuming. 

Choosing between manual and automated testing

When choosing between manual and automated testing keep it in mind that automated tests are also more reliable than manual tests as they are not prone to human error.. They are also good on multiple platforms and encourage strong communication among testing teams as well as Furthermore, automated testing can be run on multiple platforms at once, allowing teams to quickly detect issues across different operating systems and devices.

Manual vs automated testing: How does manual testing differ from automated testing?

Let us briefly explore when to use manual testing or automated testing.

Automated tests are excellent for detecting flaws in an application’s essential features and functionalities, but they cannot effectively simulate user experience. Manual testing thrives in this case.

Most test automation solutions are also confined to code, which implies that if a serious problem arises outside of the product’s code, the automated tests will miss it. For example, server response time issues due by hardware faults might cause an application to crash unexpectedly with no prior warning indications. A human tester, on the other hand, may quickly uncover such issues by carefully evaluating server response time.

The benefits of Manual Testing and Automated Testing

Benefits of Manual Testing

Outside-of-code problems are detected.

Manual testing entails looking for flaws that have no effect on the code, such as server response time. Most typical automated test tools, on the other hand, are restricted to what they can identify within the product’s code.

Emulates the user experience accurately.

Manual testing allows testers to apply their knowledge to mimic the user experience. On the other side, automated testing risks failing to reproduce many sorts of user experiences produced by diverse factors in real-world scenarios.

It contributes to the maintenance of a testable system.

Because automated tests cannot test the system in which they are embedded, manual testing can assist testers in finding issues that could render an application untestable.

Human intelligence is used to detect faults.

Manual testing helps testers to uncover software faults using higher cognitive abilities such as logical reasoning and common sense. This assists people in detecting faults that automated testing may overlook. That is also why you will always require a person to examine the tests generated by automated testing technologies.

Allows testers to concentrate on complicated features and functionalities.

It might be time-consuming to use automated tests to simulate every single situation associated with a product. Manual testing helps testers to focus less on mimicking every potential user route and more on thinking about edge situations for complicated features and functionalities. Datasets, on the other hand, may frequently be used to reuse the same automated test script to attempt multiple test cases without having to redo every single line of code.

Project knowledge of the tester

By spending more time familiarising themselves with a product’s features and functionalities, manual testing helps testers to check its quality throughout its development cycle. This helps them keep their understanding of the project, which will be essential if problems develop after modifications to the code have been done.

The drawbacks of manual vs automated testing

It takes longer than automated testing.

Manual testing necessitates additional hours spent manually examining every feature and function of the program. This takes longer than conducting automated tests, which take only a fraction of the time. Automated testing can also run without supervision overnight.

Testers must be well-versed on the product.

Before using a product efficiently, manual testers must have a thorough grasp of it. This assists them in identifying any flaws that automated testing may overlook if their knowledge is insufficient. Testers do not need to be conversant with all of the capabilities and functions of automated testing.

Maintaining manual testers is expensive.

Manual testing entails not just time but also money since they must be performed by humans (testers) rather than machines (automation tools). Automated tests are less expensive since the cost of executing them is determined by how much time is spent coding and maintaining them rather than how many times they are run.

It is prone to human mistakes.

Human mistakes, including faults caused by exhaustion, lack of attention, and distraction, are common in manual testing. If such bugs are ignored during testing, they may go undetected. Automated tests, on the other hand, are less likely to make mistakes than manual tests since testers no longer need to spend time manually verifying for flaws after each release.

Maintaining test cases is time-consuming.

It takes more time to document all manual faults identified in a program, making it more difficult to maintain track of modifications made afterwards. This may be accomplished more successfully by keeping automated tests, which only need to be updated when new features or functions are added.

The benefits of automated testing

Software testing offers several advantages, which is why SaaS companies all over the world use automation technologies. Here are some of the most significant advantages of employing automated testing for software development:

Testing is made easier.

One of benefits of automated testing is how it has made the process much easier to do.

Majority of SaaS and IT companies regularly test as part of their daily operations. It is important to keep things as straightforward as possible. Utilising automation offers many benefits. It is possible to reuse test scripts when automating test tools. In contrast, each test case that needs to be run manually requires the creation of a single line of code.

Accelerates the testing procedure

Machines and automated technologies outperform humans. This is why we employ them, in addition to enhanced precision. As a result, your software development cycles will be shorter.

Reduces the need for human involvement

Tests may be done at any time of day, including overnight, without the requirement for human supervision. Furthermore, when it is done automatically, the chance of human error is reduced.

It saves both time and money.

The benefits of automated testing extends to saving both time and money for testers. Testing can take a long time. Though automation may need an initial investment, it may save money in the long term, allowing businesses to become more cost-effective. Team members put their time to better use and are no longer obliged to perform manual testing in many cases. This enhances their workflow.

Capabilities for detailed reporting

For diverse circumstances, automation testing uses well-crafted test cases. These planned routines can be quite comprehensive and generate thorough reports that would be impossible to produce by a person. Not to mention delivering them in a shorter period of time.

Bug detection has been improved.

The last on our list when we mention the benefits of automated testing is the the ways it allows for bug detection. One of the primary reasons for testing a product is to identify bugs and other flaws. This approach is simplified by automation testing. It can also assess a broader range of test coverage than humans.

Manual vs automated testing: What are the disadvantages of automated testing?

Testing that is both dependable and maintainable is difficult to develop.

It is not easy to create a thorough suite of automated tests. They must be trustworthy enough to be performed repeatedly and regularly without producing false positives or negatives. Your test scripts, on the other hand, must be maintainable enough to respond to changes in your application. This necessitates a high degree of developer knowledge as well as meticulous design and implementation.

Cannot be applied to GUI components.

While automated tests may be used to verify the majority of your application’s functionality, they are not suitable for testing graphics or sound files. This is due to the fact that computerised examinations often require textual descriptions to validate the result. As a result, even if the information appears to be valid, conducting an automated test on a picture or audio file will almost certainly fail every time.

It must be redone for each new environment.

When you make a change in one environment, your automated tests must be updated for the findings to be valid. Unfortunately, this implies that you will have to rewrite your automated test scripts in a variety of locations within your local development environment, CI system, and production environments to guarantee that they function properly.

Produces false positives and false negatives

Even when there is no genuine problem, automated tests can fail. This might be the case if the test has a mistake or is insufficiently broad to cover all of its intended use cases. Similarly, if your tests are just meant to validate that something exists and not that it performs as expected, they may produce false negatives.


Automated tests can take longer to produce than manual tests, particularly if poorly planned. They might also be more difficult to integrate into your development workflow.

If your tests are complex or difficult to manage, the quality of your test suite may suffer. This might have a detrimental impact on achieving continuous testing over the application lifetime.

High start-up expenses

One of the biggest disadvantages of automated testing is that it requires a large amount of time and money to install at first. However, this investment is frequently swiftly recouped in terms of increased developer productivity and more reliable outputs.

Manual vs automated testing: the Differences

Software testing can be done in two different ways: manually and automatically. Utilising specialised software tools that can be programmed to run tests on the application being tested, automated testing is carried out. On the other hand, manual testing calls for a human tester to manually run tests on the application.

Automated tests are run by computers, whereas manual tests call for a tester to interact with the application being tested. This is the primary distinction between automated and manual testing. Since automated tests can run continuously without a tester’s intervention, they are more effective and quicker than manual tests. However, when dealing with complex situations or confirming the user experience, manual testing is frequently preferred.

When to use manual or automated testing?

Both the manual and automated testing processes are important in software development and can easily complement each other. However, manual testing has to do with using manual or human inputs in performing software testing while automated testing involves using test automation tools to seamlessly perform the tasks.

There are several factors that usually lead to the decision to use a particular process for testing, these include but not limited to, the type for software application, the budget, how complex the system is, and the goal of performing the test. Specifically, automated testing is important and very useful for performing or executing large test cases in a very short period while the manual testing type can be deployed for exploratory testing.

Overall, both manual and automated testing have their own advantages and disadvantages, so it’s important to consider each approach carefully before deciding.


We do hope that you enjoyed our blog on manual vs automated testing or if you like, choosing between manual and automated testing. 

If you would like the best services and clarifications on manual vs automated testing, reach out to us now.

Share This Article
Leave a comment