Automated vs Manual Testing: Key Differences

We're a startup that's building an automated testing platform. Of course we're going to tell you to automate absolutely every single one of your software testing processes - right?

Surprise.

Sure - we love automation. It's efficient, accurate, and slots perfectly into your CI/CD processes so you can release apps and updates faster than ever before. You can and should automate more of your current testing workload.

Equally, you're still building software for people to use, not machines. Barring a surprise robot uprising tomorrow, this won't change any time soon. This is why human input, especially manual UX and exploratory testing, is vital for the success of your project.

Here's what you need to know about automated and manual testing, and how to use each to best effect.

Automated Testing: the State of Play

It's now super rare for businesses to have absolutely no testing automation in place. At the same time, businesses that have completely automated all their testing are few and far between.

Take these findings from Practitest's 2024 State of Testing Report:

• 9% of software testers reported using no automation whatsoever
• 2% of respondents reported that their testing processes were 100% automated
• The most common automation percentage was up to 50% of previously manual testing
• The most commonly reported priority for testing teams was increasing automation (30%)

What does this tell us?

Firstly, businesses are interested in automating more of their testing - which tracks with automated testing solutions becoming easier to use, smarter, and more affordable.

Secondly, with relatively few businesses automating over 50% of their software testing, there's space for forward-thinking businesses to speed up their development cycle with further automation. Releasing quicker with fewer defects will make you stand out in an increasingly crowded market for digital products.

Knowing where automation really makes a difference is vital to achieving this competitive edge.

Automated Software Testing: What It Is and When to Use It

Automated software testing automates the process of validating your software's functionality using a range of tools and technology.

In some cases, your engineers or testing team will need to manually create and maintain scripts for automated testing solutions, though thanks to the rise of low/no code tools, this isn't the case 100% of the time.

Whilst there are some limitations to automated testing - it doesn't do well with testing user behavior, for example - the pros make automation a solid foundation for a good chunk of their testing workload. Automated tests run faster, save time and money on extended testing and QA teams, and make it significantly easier to produce quality, bug-free apps, particularly when:

• The test will be repeated regularly
• There are clear 'right' and 'wrong' outcomes that a test can return
• The test is highly repetitive (and therefore prone to human error)
• You're testing a function that's business critical

This makes unit testing, integration testing, system testing, and end-to-end testing prime candidates for automation.

What Tools Can I Use to Automate Software Tests?

Thanks to advances in AI, your team can save more time than ever when automating software testing.

Think low code interactive test editing, zero code assertions, visual comparisons, and even generating whole test cases - plus tests that automatically adapt to changes in your UI - check this out for more info.

Manual Testing: What It Is and When to Use It

Slower? Yes. More expensive? Definitely. Worse? Depends what you're testing.

Manual testing involves a person - usually a specialist software tester or member of a QA team - following a specific test case to report on the quality of the code and overall functionality of the software.

Traditionally, there are some areas of testing where keeping human input at the forefront is seen as an advantage:

• UX and exploratory testing: a machine will not experience a digital product in the same way a human can. Keeping UX testing manual allows you to properly gauge whether your user base will love or loathe your software and take action to fix it.
• Complex test scenarios: the more complex the test, the more complex the automation needed to run it - building overly complex test scripts is a time drain and presents its own risk of error. Manual testers can often respond to unforeseen complexities more effectively.
• Infrequent tests: If certain test scenarios only need occasional use, the time spent creating and maintaining automated scripts might outweigh the benefits.

The advantage of manual testing for these latter two points will start to diminish as automated testing solutions become more advanced.

AI testing tools become more capable by the minute for building complex test cases - so navigating complicated scenarios and maintaining occasional test scripts are likely to become non-issues for automation. We mentioned that you can and should automate more of your testing - manual tests in these two categories are prime candidates.

Where manual testing truly excels is in user behavior-based tests. The best way to test the UX of your product is to put your product in front of real humans, whose actions and real-world feedback can't be replicated by AI.

Manual Testing and Technology

Manual testing doesn't necessarily mean 'technology free'.

In fact, there are a load of great tools out there which save your software engineers and testers a ton of effort when running manual tests. For example, AI testing solutions allow you to locate elements with a simple natural language description rather than relying on XPath or CSS selectors, and reduce workload with interactive, low-code editors.

Manual Testing vs Automated Testing: Key Process Differences

It's not just the tests themselves that differ - choosing manual or automated testing will affect how your processes run, who's involved, and how you need to budget.

Who Does the Testing?

Manual software testing is time-consuming and requires a specific skill set, which is why businesses often have specialist software testing or external QA teams on hand.

Is this 'hand off' process ideal in modern software development, where speed is of the essence and CI/CD rules supreme? Probably not.

Automated testing tools make it easier for developers to run more tests themselves without a significant increase in workload, and link seamlessly with CI/CD platforms for speed of release. Your developers can finish a section of code, instantly run a unit test, and have the results pronto. No need to wait days for results to be returned. No communication errors between your development and testing teams that slow things down further.

When Can You Test?

Traditionally, manual software testing takes place after the main development phase. Seeing each as two separate phases adds unnecessary time onto your project or sprint.

Automated testing makes it easier for developers to test their own code, so that you can test earlier and focus on defect prevention, rather than fixing bugs after they have been coded into your software.

This 'shift left' approach saves time and money, as bugs are generally easier to fix earlier on in the software development process.

Whilst you can implement a shift left approach with manual testing, the separation between development and testing teams makes things more complicated. It can happen - but the more manual your testing process, the more organization this will take.

Costs and Budgeting

Automated software testing has the potential to save your business significant amounts of money in the long run.

There will be some ongoing costs associated with automated software testing, such as software subscriptions - but these are far cheaper than maintaining large software testing or QA teams. Mostly, the costs of automated software testing are upfront.

You'll need to factor an initial spend on automated testing tools (and associated training) into your budget. Whilst this might seem high, the efficiency and software quality improvements you'll see as a result offer a quick turnaround on your investment.

Manual Testing vs Automated Testing: A Summary

	Pros	Cons	Use cases	Used by	Used when	Cost
Automated	Faster, cheaper, more accurate in the right circumstances	Doesn't work when testing user behavior	Repeatable, repetitive tests with defined outcome, e.g., unit testing	Both developers and software testing teams	Easier to test earlier, making defects easier to fix	Larger upfront outlay on software/training. Faster ROI.
Manual	Insight into how real people interact with your app	Slower, more resource intensive, significant potential for human error	UX and exploratory testing which requires human evaluation	Mostly QA/software testing teams	Usually after main development stage	Significant but consistent monthly outlay on personnel; slower ROI

Momentic: Your Engineers' Software Testing Cheat Code?

“Momentic makes it 3x faster for our team to write and maintain end to end tests.”
Alex Cui, CTO, GPTZero

We'd love to see if Momentic's AI testing tools could help you optimize your software testing life cycle.

If, like Alex and his team, you're keen to save over two thirds of the time you spend on key testing processes, why not schedule a conversation with our founder, Wei-Wei Wu?