Robot Framework vs WebdriverIO

Free and open source

Free and open source

Free and open source. You pay in engineering time and CI minutes.

Free and open source. You pay in engineering time and CI minutes.

Everything, self-hosted

Everything, self-hosted

Widely used

Robot Framework Foundation · since 2008

Widely used

OpenJS Foundation · since 2015

• Non-developers can read and often write the tests, which matters in QA-led organisations.
• Extends far beyond browsers: databases, SSH, serial, network equipment.
• Extremely stable and well-supported in regulated and telecom environments.

• One API for web and native mobile, which is rare and genuinely useful if you ship both.
• Vendor-neutral: swap between local, grid and any device cloud by changing config.
• Mature plugin ecosystem for reporting, visual testing and accessibility.

• The keyword abstraction fights you once logic gets complex; you end up writing Python behind the keywords anyway.
• Verbose syntax and whitespace-sensitive files that are awkward to review in a diff.
• Feels dated next to modern JavaScript tooling, and hiring is harder.

• Configuration-heavy compared to Playwright; the wdio.conf.js file becomes a project of its own.
• Inherits WebDriver's flakiness characteristics when used in WebDriver mode.
• Smaller community than Playwright or Cypress, so obscure problems take longer to solve.

QA-led and regulated organisations where readability by non-programmers is a requirement.

JavaScript teams that need one framework covering both web and native mobile.