Shawn Shaligram

Software Engineer in Test

Comparing Espresso v Appium Test Frameworks

Among the myriad of mobile automation frameworks available, Espresso and Appium stand out as popular choices for mobile testing on Android. In this post, I’ll dive deeper into their features, pros and cons, and considerations around debugging, CI/CD integration, and community support. I have hands on experience working both of these frameworks in my previous roles and below I go through my analysis.

Appium Framework Architecture

+---------------+
|    Client     |
+---------------+
        |
        | WebDriver Protocol (JSON Wire Protocol)
        |
+---------------+
|   Appium      |
|   Server      |
+---------------+
        |
        | Bootstrap or UIAutomation (iOS)
        | UIAutomator or Espresso (Android)
        |
+---------------+
|   Mobile OS   |
|  (iOS/Android)|
+---------------+
        |
+---------------+
|   App Under   |
|     Test      |
+---------------+

The Appium framework follows a client-server architecture:

  • Client: The client is the test script written in a programming language like Java, Python, or Ruby. It sends commands to the Appium server using the WebDriver protocol (also known as the JSON Wire Protocol).

  • Appium Server: The Appium server acts as a middleware between the client and the mobile device or emulator/simulator. It receives commands from the client and translates them into corresponding actions on the target device.

  • Mobile OS: On the mobile device side, Appium leverages different automation frameworks depending on the platform:

    • For iOS, it uses either the Bootstrap or UIAutomation frameworks.
    • For Android, it uses either the UIAutomator or Espresso frameworks.

  • App Under Test: The mobile app being tested is installed and running on the target device or emulator/simulator. During the test execution, the client sends commands (e.g., tap, swipe, getText) to the Appium server, which then communicates with the respective automation framework on the target device. The automation framework interacts with the app under test and performs the requested actions or retrieves the desired information.

Espresso Framework Architecture

+---------------+
|     Test      |
|    Runner     |
+---------------+
        |
+---------------+
|   Espresso    |
|    Library    |
+---------------+
        |
+---------------+
|   Android     |
|Instrumentation|
+---------------+
        |
+---------------+
|   App Under   |
|     Test      |
+---------------+

The Espresso framework is designed specifically for Android UI testing and has a simpler architecture:

  • Test Runner: The test runner is responsible for executing the Espresso tests. It can be either the Android JUnit runner or the Android Test Orchestrator.

  • Espresso Library: The Espresso library provides a set of APIs and utilities for writing UI tests. It includes features like view matchers, actions, assertions, and synchronization mechanisms.

  • Android Instrumentation: Espresso tests run within the Android Instrumentation framework, which allows the tests to interact with the app under test while it is running.

  • App Under Test: The Android app being tested is installed and running on the device or emulator.

Tradeoffs

When working with Espresso and Appium, there are several tradeoffs to consider:

  • Platform Support: Espresso is designed specifically for Android, while Appium supports both Android and iOS platforms. Espresso seamlessly integrates with Kotlin, enabling developers to leverage Kotlin’s concise syntax and powerful features for writing expressive tests. Appium allows for testing both iOS and Android applications using a single codebase, making it ideal for teams working on hybrid or cross-platform projects.

  • Test Execution Speed: Espresso tests generally run faster than Appium tests, as Espresso is tightly integrated with the Android platform and can leverage the Android Instrumentation framework.

  • Test Reliability: Espresso tests are considered more reliable and stable, as they are designed to run on the same process as the app under test. Appium tests, on the other hand, interact with the app through the WebDriver protocol, which can be more prone to flakiness or instability.

  • Test Complexity: Espresso tests are typically easier to write and understand, especially for developers familiar with Android development. Appium tests can be more complex, as they need to handle various device configurations and platform differences.

  • Test Setup and Configuration: Espresso tests are generally easier to set up and configure, as they are part of the Android development ecosystem. Appium tests require additional setup and configuration, such as setting up the Appium server and configuring desired capabilities.

  • Testing Approach: Espresso is designed for white-box testing, where you have access to the app’s source code and internal components. Appium is better suited for black-box testing, where you interact with the app as an end-user without access to the source code.

Conclusion

If you are working on Android-specific projects and have access to the app’s source code, Espresso may be the preferred choice for UI testing due to its speed, reliability, and integration with the Android ecosystem. However, if you need to test both Android and iOS apps, or if you are performing black-box testing without access to the source code, Appium may be a more suitable choice, despite its potential trade-offs in terms of test execution speed and reliability.

You May Also Enjoy