No vendor sponsorships. No affiliate links on tool pages. Pricing re-verified monthly.
[lab]besttestautomationtool.com

Compare brief · Greenfield JS SPA decision

Playwright vs Cypress

Playwright vs Cypress is the single most common shortlist decision in greenfield JavaScript shops in 2026. Both are open-source runners with paid cloud overlays; both are well-engineered. The choice is shaped by parallelism, browser coverage, and the trade-offs page Cypress publishes itself.

Direct answer

Our take: pick Playwright unless you have a deliberate reason for the Cypress architecture. The 2026 adoption gap (45 percent vs 14 percent) reflects real engineering trade-offs, not just mindshare.

open-source

Playwright

composite: 88 · pricing: public

Surged past Selenium in 2026 developer adoption (~45% vs ~22%); 33M weekly npm downloads; component-testing now GA; VS Code Playwright Test extension partnership with BrowserStack (Sep 2025).

Open the Playwright brief →

open-source

Cypress

composite: 72 · pricing: public

Adoption flat at ~14% in 2026 surveys; 6.5M weekly npm downloads; Cypress Cloud Team tier listed around $300/mo on the published structure.

Open the Cypress brief →

Pick A when

Pick Playwright when

Cross-browser including WebKit, multi-tab tests, cross-origin in one test, deeper parallelism on a single tier.

Pick B when

Pick Cypress when

Time-travel debugging UI, friendlier author ergonomics on a small team, an existing Cypress Cloud investment.

Cost

How the cost picture differs

At 20 parallel sessions, the Playwright TCO is dominated by CI minutes; the Cypress TCO is split between Cloud results and CI minutes. At 100 parallel, Cypress's per-result pricing becomes the bigger line for high-result suites.

Open the 3-year TCO calculator →

Caveats

Things this compare cannot answer

  • Cypress publishes its own trade-offs reference. Read it before adopting.
  • Playwright's WebKit support is best-in-class but Safari-on-iOS still needs a real-device cloud for full coverage.