GoQA vs Mabl
Teams evaluating a Mabl alternative are usually weighing a low-code cloud test runner against an option that gives engineers more control over the runner, the test format, and what gets checked beyond functional flows. This page compares GoQA and Mabl on those points, based on publicly documented capabilities at time of writing.
At a glance
| Feature | GoQA | Mabl |
|---|---|---|
| Authoring model | AI generation from text, URL, screenshot, OpenAPI | Low-code journey builder, AI assists |
| Output format | Gherkin .feature, JSON, Excel | Mabl journeys, native cloud runner |
| Runners | None — you implement the cases in your own framework | Mabl cloud runner |
| Live-site audits | WCAG (axe-core), Lighthouse, OWASP-aligned security checks, SEO, broken links | Functional and basic accessibility checks |
| Free tier | $0 forever, 200 cases/request, 10 AI test generations and 5 crawls/mo | See vendor site |
| Enterprise | Custom pricing through sales | See vendor site |
Where they overlap
Both GoQA and Mabl use AI to lower the cost of building and maintaining web tests. Both can look at staging or production URLs. Each is built around the idea that QA teams should not be writing every assertion by hand.
Both also let you organize tests centrally and surface results to non-engineers — Mabl through its journey UI, GoQA through the Test Repository.
Where GoQA is different
Two differences matter most.
It pairs case generation with live-site audits. A single GoQA run can output BDD test cases and an audit covering WCAG via axe-core, Lighthouse performance, OWASP-aligned security checks, SEO issues and broken links. Mabl focuses on functional journeys; broader site-quality coverage is less central. If you need accessibility and performance evidence on the same release as functional regression, GoQA consolidates that.
It is engineer-led on the runner side. GoQA exports Gherkin (.feature), JSON, or Excel, and your team implements the Gherkin in the framework it already uses, such as Playwright, Selenium, Cypress or WebdriverIO. Mabl runs tests on its own cloud, which is convenient if you want a managed runner but constraining if you have an existing Playwright suite you do not want to rewrite.
GoQA also accepts inputs Mabl typically does not: an OpenAPI spec for backend contract cases, a screenshot run through OCR, or a raw URL scraped for elements. See /test-cases for input options.
Where Mabl may fit better
Mabl is the better tool in two specific scenarios:
- Low-code-only QA teams. If your testers do not write code and you do not want them to, Mabl's managed cloud runner removes the runner-selection question entirely. GoQA assumes someone on the team will pick a runner and wire it into CI.
- Single managed platform. If you want one vendor handling authoring, execution, and reporting, Mabl is closer to that. GoQA authors and audits; you bring your own execution.
If either applies, Mabl is likely the right call.
Pricing comparison
GoQA's pricing is public:
- Starter: $0 forever, 200 cases per request, 10 AI test generations and 5 website crawls per month
- Enterprise: custom pricing through sales, with unlimited generations, crawls of up to 50 pages, the Test Repository and unlimited teammates
See the vendor site for Mabl pricing. Full tier details are at /pricing.
Migration notes
Moving from Mabl to GoQA:
- Export your Mabl journey definitions or step descriptions as plain-language acceptance criteria. These become the input for GoQA generation.
- Generate Gherkin and review it. The eighteen-plus case types include negative, boundary, accessibility, security, and performance scenarios that may not have existed in your Mabl journeys.
- Choose a framework and implement the step definitions. Playwright is the common pick for new estates; Selenium, Cypress and WebdriverIO also work with Gherkin.
- If your team triages in another tool, export Excel or JSON and import it there; GoQA does not sync with other tools.
- Use the audits — WCAG, Lighthouse, OWASP, SEO — as a separate gate, not just at the end of regression.
/services and /contact cover assisted migration.
FAQ
Can GoQA run tests on its own cloud like Mabl does? No. GoQA authors and exports tests; execution happens on the runner you choose, on your infrastructure or any cloud grid you use.
Does the WCAG audit replace a manual accessibility review? It covers what axe-core can detect automatically, which is a large but partial portion of WCAG. Manual review is still needed for full conformance.
How does GoQA handle API tests if I upload an OpenAPI spec? It generates BDD scenarios for documented endpoints, including happy-path, negative, and boundary cases, exportable as Gherkin you can implement with the same framework as your UI tests.
Try it
Run a free site audit at /free-audit or generate your first BDD cases at /test-cases.