QA Testing Tool Comparison: Jenkins vs. Mabl

Quality assurance is everything in software development, and only with the right automation testing tools can software providers attain a desired level of product quality in a faster, more effective manner.

With those points in mind, many software companies will consider the likes of solutions like Jenkins and Mabl.

Indeed, Jenkins and Mabl are both widely used tools in the realm of software quality assurance (QA) testing, but they serve different purposes and have distinct features.

And depending on the type of project, one tool may be better suited than the other.

Comparing Jenkins vs. Mabl: Key Features & Differences


  • Automation Server:  Jenkins has an open-source automation server that is primarily used for continuous integration (CI) and continuous delivery (CD) processes. It facilitates the automation of building, testing, and deploying software applications.
  • Extensibility: The tool offers a high level of extensibility through its vast ecosystem of plugins. Users can extend Jenkins' functionality by installing plugins for various purposes, such as source code management, build automation, and test execution.
  • Customization: Jenkins allows users to customize their CI/CD pipelines according to their specific requirements. Users can define workflows, triggers, and stages to orchestrate the software development lifecycle (SDLC) and automate repetitive tasks.
  • Integration: The technology integrates seamlessly with a wide range of development and testing tools, including version control systems (e.g., Git, Subversion), build tools (e.g., Maven, Gradle), and testing frameworks (e.g., JUnit, Selenium).
  • Self-Managed: Jenkins requires users to set up and manage their own infrastructure for hosting and maintaining the Jenkins server. Users are responsible for configuring security settings, scaling resources, and ensuring uptime.


  • Automated Testing Platform: Mabl is a cloud-based automated testing platform that specializes in end-to-end testing and regression testing of web applications. It uses machine learning algorithms to automate test creation, execution, and maintenance.
  • AI-Powered Testing: The system leverages artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to enhance test automation. It automatically learns the behavior of web applications, identifies UI elements, and generates resilient test scripts that adapt to changes in the application.
  • Codeless Testing: Mabl offers a codeless testing approach, allowing users to create and execute tests without writing any code. Testers can use Mabl's intuitive interface to define test scenarios, validate application behavior, and analyze test results.
  • Test Insights: The tool provides detailed insights into test results, including test coverage, performance metrics, and regression analysis. It offers actionable recommendations for improving application quality and identifying potential issues.
  • Managed Service: Mabl is a managed service that is hosted and maintained by the Mabl team. Users do not need to manage infrastructure or worry about software updates, security patches, or scalability.

The Differences

  • Focus: Jenkins is primarily focused on CI/CD automation and orchestration, whereas Mabl specializes in automated testing of web applications with a focus on ease of use and AI-powered testing.
  • Deployment: While Jenkins is self-managed and requires users to set up and maintain their own infrastructure, Mabl is a managed service that is hosted and maintained by the Mabl team.
  • Testing Approach: Unlike Mabl, Jenkins requires users to define and manage their test scripts and workflows manually. Mabl, on the other hand, offers a codeless testing approach and leverages AI to automate test creation and maintenance.
  • Integration: Jenkins integrates with a wide range of development and testing tools, but Mabl provides integrations with popular CI/CD platforms and issue tracking systems but has a more limited scope of integration compared to Jenkins.

Select the Right Testing Tool

Clearly, both automated QA testing solutions can do a lot, but they work best in their respective QA testing ecosystems, catering to different needs and use cases.

One of the major takeaways is that Jenkins is better suited for CI/CD automation and orchestration, whereas Mabl performs better in automated testing of web applications with its AI-powered, codeless testing approach.

Of course, there are other quality assurance testing tools, but we feel these are some of the first ones to consider.

But no matter what solution investment management software companies prefer, Empaxis has the resources and experiences to be there at every step of the way, ensuring smooth, seamless, and successful QA testing.

Chat with an Expert

Get the latest in automation, investment operations technology, & outsourcing

Our monthly newsletter features helpful resources, articles, and tips to implement at your investment firm. Enter your email below to subscribe: