The software product quality, as well as user satisfaction rate entirely depend on the chosen testing approach. In case it’s selected and conducted inappropriately, the launched solution may contain bugs, which will result in financial as well as audience loss.

Let’s reveal the distinction between the two testing approaches- manual and automated. We’ll also cover what are their main benefits, flaws, and use cases.

The Concept and Principle of Each Type

Manual Type

This type refers to testing conducted by hand. In other words, Quality Assurance specialists check the operation of the product under diverse conditions.

In case you are choosing to cooperate with an offshore software development company or hire the QA team from such vendors, you will be charged according to how many hours were spent on product verifying . Such an approach is efficient for conducting several plain tests rapidly, precisely, and efficiently. In addition, it is worth mentioning that selecting complete automation is not real.

Besides, with such an approach, testers are enabled to gather the audience’s reviews. It’s an excellent way to enhance the overall user experience by analyzing what aspects of the product may be improved.

On which occasions is the manual approach beneficial?

  • Usability testing
  • Adhoc testing
  • Exploratory testing

Automation Testing

Such an approach implies the testing process carried out by the built script. Despite the fact that the QA process simply can’t dispense with the manual test, there are certain checks that are too difficult for manual conducting. Therefore, this type is also indispensable for software engineers.

Automation testing enables observing the UI for diverse gadgets and is applied for the general QA flows of occasionally changing cases. This type should be used in case the product’s features were primarily checked and approved manually.

On which occasions may the automation type be used?

  • Load and performance tests
  • Smoke tests
  • Acceptance tests
  • Regression tests
  • GUI, API, Unit tests
  • Integration tests

Manual Testing: Pros and Cons


  • Rapidity and flexibility. With this approach, developers can simply and fastly verify minor updates and edits in the digital solution. What is more, there’s an ability to make edits in the feature with no need to change the test, as they are not automated.
  • Audience opinion. Reviews from first customers may also be assembled from the audience to implement further enhancements. There’s an unlimited amount of test conditions your team can create to maximize the satisfaction from the UI.
  • Visual aspect. With the manual approach, QA engineers are able to not only assess if the software operates as planned but evaluate the UI flaws quickly. The script isn’t able to reveal the visual limitations.


  • Human factor. The number of flaws in the manual approach entirely  depends on the expertise of QA proficients accomplishing it. Specialists may easily miss possible flaws in the product by virtue of inattentiveness or insufficient competence and experience.
  • Time-consuming type. Such tests may be set and performed in the background without your involvement. To complete the whole process manually, there are more financial as well as human resources and time required. In addition, manual tests are suitable for single usage.
  • Testing complexity. There are certain tests that are mich simpler to complete automatically rather than by hand. For example, load/stress testing.

Automation Testing: Benefits and Drawbacks


  • Cost-efficiency. The solution verifying conducted without  QA experts engaged is an opportunity to save expenses and perform this process more rapidly. Developers spend time only writing reusable testing scripts.
  • Simplified reporting. There are great reporting instruments such as Allure, Tosca, and UTF that display the QA checking results for engineers.
  • Reasonable resources distribution and high precision. Huge projects can miss certain elements of the product or automate the process prior to release. Besides, as it was already mentioned, the testing codes can be used as many times as needed. Therefore, engineers can focus on more complex tasks within manual testing.
  • Quick delivery. The number of hours necessary for testing grows parallelly with the product’s elaboration. Thus, automation serves as a huge time economy under such circumstances.


  • Live competence elimination. Automated testing isn’t able to provide an opinion concerning the UI/UX design. The client experience and feedback can be received only with manual solution checks.
  • Unpredictable detection. It may be surprising, but lots of bugs are brought out accidentally. Automating approach implies performing a set row of actions. Thus, there’s no opportunity to detect more flaws.
  • Expensive for startups. QA engineers are in-demand specialists, so as the automation type of testing. Their services may be pretty expensive, as this option needs regular support.

The Final Comparison: Automation vs. Manual Testing Approach

Let’s now make a conclusion concerning each type by the following criteria:

  • Cost. When it comes to the manual option, it varies due to the experts and their hourly rates. The price for the automation approach is defined by the tools involved.
  • Time. Manual testing is more time-consuming. Automation testing requires less time, as it is fulfilled by the program.
  • Tools. With the manual approach, they are Postman, Charlesproxy, Android studio, and Swagger. When applying automation, they are Python, pytest, requests, Apache JMeter/Locust/ Selenium web driver.
  • Precision. The human factor is a key point in determining the testing accuracy for manual type. Talking about the automation, the precision is higher as it is performed by the system.
  • Visual aspect. The script can’t assess the UI/UX design, so the manual approach is more efficient here.
  • Reporting. Flaws and errors reports, Jira tasks, and enhancement reports are possible with the manual approach. Whereas automation testing enables Junit/ Allure reporting.


So what option is the most efficient? It certainly depends on the case, the project, and its scale. It is also worth noting that testing becomes most effective if both approaches are used together in combination.

Moreover, a decisive factor in the question of choosing an approach to testing lies in the software development vendor that you choose. After all, the expertise of the QA engineers in writing a script for testing or performing manual verifying directly determines the thoroughness and quality of the whole process. Because of this fact, it is worth applying to the highly qualified, certified, and experienced specialists in this matter.


What is manual testing?

This approach refers to testing conducted by hand. In other words, Quality Assurance specialists examine and control the operation of the digital product within diverse conditions.

What is automation testing?

Such type refers to testing fulfilled by the series of scripts. Despite the fact that the process simply can’t do without the manual test, there are certain checks that are too difficult for manual conducting.

What are the main pros of manual testing?

  • Rapidity and flexibility
  • Audience opinion
  • Visual aspect

What are the primary disadvantages of manual testing?

  • Human factor
  • Time-consuming type
  • Testing complexity

What are the great advantages of the automation approach?

  • Cost-efficiency
  • Reasonable resources distribution and high precision.
  • Simplified reporting
  • Quick delivery

What are the substantial flaws of automation type?

  • Live competence elimination
  • Unpredictable detection
  • Costly for startups

Author’s bio:

Yuliya Melnik is a technical writer at Cleveroad. It is a web and mobile app development company in Ukraine. She is passionate about innovative technologies that make the world a better place and loves creating content that evokes vivid emotions.