Testim Development Kit Open Beta Overview Register Today

Best JavaScript Testing Framework? 5 to Consider

The JavaScript world offers plenty of options for ... well, pretty much everything. Today we'll focus on testing tools, answering…

By Erin,

The JavaScript world offers plenty of options for … well, pretty much everything. Today we’ll focus on testing tools, answering the question “What is the best JavaScript framework?”

We’ll walk you through five of the most popular JavaScript testing frameworks and, by the end of the article, we’ll be electing the one we think is the best. Let’s begin.

What Are Testing Frameworks?

Before we dive into our list of frameworks, it’s important to understand what a testing framework is.

Put simply, a testing framework is a tool—or set of tools—that helps you perform unit testing. A testing framework should provide you with at least

  • Rules or conventions for writing test cases and organizing them in test suites.
  • Means to automatically execute and self-grade the tests.
  • Results of the tests that are displayed and formatted.

Five JavaScript Testing Frameworks Worth Checking Out

By now you should have a firm grasp on what testing frameworks are and why we need them. With that out of our way, it’s time to tackle our list of tools, starting with Mocha.

Mocha

Mocha, sometimes also called MochaJS, is a test framework that runs both in Node.js and in the browser. It was released back in 2011 and since then has been one of the most popular testing frameworks for the JavaScript world. However, according to the State of JavaScript report, Mocha’s popularity has been on the decline in the last few years, even though it’s still arguably the most used and known of the tools.

This framework makes asynchronous testing simple by running tests serially. That enables accurate reporting and, at the same time, mapping of uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases. The Mocha framework has an extremely flexible configuration. It allows you to pair it with the libraries you particularly need for functionalities such as assertions, mocking, and so on.

The downside of such flexibility is that Mocha requires more work for its initial setup. Also, while other frameworks already come with assertions and mocking functionalities, Mocha requires additional tools for that.

Official site: mochajs.org
Repository: github.com/mochajs/mocha

Puppeteer

Puppeteer is a Node.js library that allows users to control a headless Chrome or Chromium browser. That way it’s possible to automate tests that you’d typically perform manually using a regular browser. The project’s page lists some examples of tests you can perform:

  • Generate screenshots and PDFs of pages.
  • Crawl an SPA (single-page application) and generate pre-rendered content (i.e., “SSR” [server-side rendering]).
  • Automate form submission, UI testing, keyboard input, etc.
  • Create an up-to-date, automated testing environment. Run your tests directly in the latest version of Chrome using the latest JavaScript and browser features.
  • Capture a timeline trace of your site to help diagnose performance issues.
  • Test Chrome extensions.

Official site: developers.google.com/web/tools/puppeteer
Repository: github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer

Jasmine

Jasmine is a JavaScript BDD (behavior-driven development) test framework.

This framework already comes with pretty much everything you need to start testing. It has built-in assertions and test doubles with spies, unlike, say, Mocha, which requires you to install third-party tools for those functionalities.

However, Jasmine is also flexible and can integrate seamlessly with a large number of additional testing tools. You can easily use Karma as a test runner or employ Sinon.JS for your mocking needs.

Official site: jasmine.github.io/
Repository: github.com/jasmine/jasmine

QUnit

QUnit was originally part of the jQuery programming library. John Resig created it for testing jQuery, jQuery UI, and jQuery Mobile. In 2008, QUnit was extracted from the jQuery codebase and released as a standalone framework, but it would still require jQuery to work. In 2009, they fixed that with a rewrite, making QUnit finally independent from jQuery.

Despite originally targeting jQuery, QUnit is currently a generic framework that can test any JavaScript code, supporting both client- and server-side environments.

You could think of QUnit as being the JavaScript representative in the xUnit family of unit testing frameworks. It has a quick and easy setup. Also, since it’s been around for at least 12 years, it’s a well-supported tool.

Official site: qunitjs.com
Repository: github.com/qunitjs/qunit

Jest

Jest is a testing framework for JavaScript that focuses on simplicity. Released by Facebook, Jest aims to work out of the box and with no configuration needed.

If you take a look at the Jest “getting started” page, you’ll see that you can install it, write your first test, and run it in a matter of a few minutes, without complicated setups or additional installs. Another advantage of Jest is its impressive performance.

Jest is primarily used for testing React applications, but that doesn’t mean you’re restricted to using it to test only apps written with the framework. On the contrary: you can use it to test Node, Angular, and Vue applications as well, just to name a few.

Official site: jestjs.io/
Repository: github.com/facebook/jest

Notable Absences

You might be wondering why some famous JavaScript testing tools didn’t make it to our list. Maybe you feel that tools like Karma, Sinon, and Chai, among others, are popular enough to be on the list. Why didn’t we include them?

Put simply, we wanted to keep the list as concise as possible. To do that, we’ve decided not to include on the list testing tools that aren’t frameworks, strictly speaking. So, that’s the reason a super popular tool such as Karma didn’t make it: it’s a test runner, not a framework. The same reasoning applies to Sinon (a mocking tool) and Chai (an assertion library).

You might argue that Puppeteer doesn’t quite fit into the list and, to some extent, I’d agree. That is to say, all of the other tools are frameworks more suited to performing unit testing–style tests, while Puppeteer is more of a browser automation tool. It is still a testing framework, though, in the sense that it allows you to design automated tests that are later run without human intervention.

Verdict: What’s the Best JavaScript Testing Framework?

We’ve presented five testing frameworks for JavaScript. It’s now time to deliver on the post title’s promise and select the best one. To do that, we’re going to judge the frameworks according to four criteria: cost, installation, ease of setup, and learning curve.

Evaluating the Frameworks

Cost

The first criterion is certainly the easiest one for us to evaluate. All of the frameworks we’ve covered here are open-source projects, so you can download and use them for free (as in beer). So, we have no clear winner here. Let’s move on.

Installation

Installing all of the tools above is fairly easy. After all, you can install all of them by using npm (or, alternatively, Yarn.) However, some of the tools offer additional installation options.

For instance, besides npm and Yarn, you can install QUnit as a standalone download. But that would require you to store and manage this asset. Instead, you can use the version hosted at the jQuery CDN. Jasmine also offers a standalone version that doesn’t depend on Node and allows you to run specs using your browser.

So, do we have a winner here? We think so. If we were to pick based only on ease of installation, we would have another draw. But, as we’ve seen, QUnit and Jasmine both offer more options, since you can use them as standalone libraries. Is this additional flexibility useful? Your mileage may vary on this, but for us, QUnit and Jasmine are the winners here.

Winners: QUnit and Jasmine

Ease of Setup

Now, let’s look at the ease of setup. When it comes to the initial setup, we have a clear winner here: Jest. The framework promises zero-config usage and delivers on that promise. Sure, it allows you to do optional configurations, but it does feel amazing to install a testing framework and have a real test running in about two minutes, without any configuration or installation of further tools.

Winner: Jest

Learning Curve

Finally, the learning curve. We’ll have to pick Jest again here. Since it comes with a wide API and doesn’t require as many third-party tools as the other frameworks, Jest inevitably presents a less steep learning curve.

Winner: Jest

Here’s the Winner

After covering five JavaScript testing frameworks, and then analyzing them using four criteria, it’s time to pick a winner.

So, since it was the winner in two of the four criteria we used, we’re going to pick Jest as our winner. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try the other tools. On the contrary: experiment and practice as much as you can since that’s the best way to learn.

Also, don’t ever stop reading and studying. There are many great sources of information around the web. One of them is the very site you’re reading right now: the Testim blog, where we often publish articles on JavaScript testing, automated testing in general, and other quality-related topics.

Testim's latest articles, right in your inbox.

From our latest feature releases, to the way it impacts the businesses of our clients, follow the evolution of our product

Blog Subscribe