Why the Future of Test Automation is Code AND No-Code

As AutomationSTAR brings together leaders and practitioners in testing, one ongoing debate always comes up: should test automation be code-driven or no-code?

The truth is, the strongest strategies use both. By letting each approach play to its strengths, teams cut bottlenecks, empower more contributors, and deliver quality software faster.

The Pitfalls of Choosing One Approach

When organizations lean too heavily on one side—whether code or no-code—the same challenges show up again and again:

• Skill gaps: Different levels of coding expertise create dependencies and slow progress.
• Silos: Developers, QA, and manual testers often work separately, with little shared visibility.
• Maintenance overhead: Coded frameworks can be fragile and time-consuming to update, while a no-code-only strategy can limit flexibility for advanced scenarios.

Instead of streamlining releases, testing becomes another obstacle—especially when framed as code versus no-code instead of embracing both.

The Strengths of Code-Based Automation

Code-based frameworks like Selenium, Cypress, and Playwright remain essential for complex cases. They provide:

• Flexibility and customization to test virtually any scenario
• Fine-grained control over selectors, browser behavior, and environments
• Precision for complex workflows and edge cases

For engineering teams, code is still the best tool when precision and customization are required.

The Strengths of No-Code Automation

No-code testing platforms thrive on speed and accessibility. With plain-language authoring and visual interfaces, they allow non-technical testers to contribute directly. They excel at:

• Regression and smoke tests that repeat across releases
• Routine workflows that don’t require custom code
• Broad participation across QA and business testers

The benefit: engineers aren’t pulled into repetitive work, freeing them to focus on higher-value challenges.

Code + No-Code in Action

The difference becomes clear when comparing the two side by side. In one demo, a Selenium test for a simple e-commerce checkout flow took nearly an hour to script. Using a no-code approach, the same flow—with assertions—was built in just two minutes.

Real-World Proof: EVERSANA

EVERSANA INTOUCH, a global life sciences agency, needed to unify testing across distributed teams while meeting strict compliance requirements. Their approach:

• Adopted code-based visual testing for precision.
• Expanded to no-code test automation, enabling global manual testers to build end-to-end tests directly in the browser.
• Result: A 65%+ reduction in regression testing time, faster validation across browsers and environments, and improved collaboration across roles.

The biggest change wasn’t only speed—it was trust. Developers, testers, and compliance began working from shared results, cutting duplicate effort and improving confidence across the organization.

Takeaway for QA and Engineering Leaders

The question isn’t “code or no-code?” It’s how best to integrate both. By using no-code for regression and repeatable flows, and code for complex scenarios, teams reduce bottlenecks, shorten feedback cycles, and scale their testing with confidence.

For mid-size to enterprise teams, this balanced approach delivers:

• Faster test creation and execution
• Greater collaboration across roles and skill levels
• A strategy that keeps pace with modern release cycles

Closing Thought

The future of testing isn’t about choosing sides—it’s about working smarter with both. At AutomationSTAR, we look forward to exploring how code and no-code together are shaping the next generation of test automation.

Stop by the Applitools booth at AutomationSTAR to continue the conversation.

Author

Applitools are exhibitors in this years’ AutomationSTAR Conference EXPO. Join us in Amsterdam 10-11 November 2025.