Appium is still the default open-source bridge for WebDriver-style mobile automation across iOS and Android. It shines when you want one API, deep CI integration, and explicit control over elements. It also asks for ongoing investment in locators, waits, and driver plumbing — which is why many teams evaluate alternatives.
If Appium feels too heavy for your current phase, these approaches cover the most common escape hatches. Each solves a different problem; none is a universal replacement:
FinalRun — Open-source, vision + LLM automation: plain-English steps in YAML, minimal selectors, Apache 2.0. Pairs cleanly with AI coding agents (Cursor, Claude Code, Codex) for install, test generation, and run-until-green loops. Best when UI churn and locator maintenance hurt more than raw WebDriver control.
Maestro — Open-source declarative YAML flows for iOS and Android, with built-in tolerance for flaky UI and optional cloud scale. Strong when you want readable flows without Appium’s stack.
Espresso — Google’s Android-native UI framework; fast and stable, Java/Kotlin, Android Studio–integrated.
XCUITest — Apple’s iOS-native automation; Swift/Objective-C, Xcode-integrated, excellent stability on Apple stacks.
Detox — React Native–focused gray-box automation; JavaScript, syncs with app state, great for RN teams.
Quick comparison
| Tool |
Platforms |
Language |
Flakiness handling |
Cost |
Key limitation |
| FinalRun |
iOS, Android (simulators / devices via project setup) |
YAML (plain-English steps) |
Vision adapts when layout shifts; LLM variance is a trade-off |
Open source + LLM/compute usage |
Not a WebDriver drop-in; needs LLM for typical setup |
| Maestro |
iOS, Android |
YAML (declarative flows) |
Built-in waits / tolerance; fewer manual sleeps |
Core free; cloud is paid |
Less suited to the most intricate low-level scenarios |
| Espresso |
Android only |
Java / Kotlin |
UI thread sync, idling resources |
Free (tooling) |
Android-only |
| XCUITest |
iOS only |
Swift / Objective-C |
Native instrumentation, accessibility IDs |
Free (Xcode) |
iOS-only |
| Detox |
React Native (iOS / Android) |
JavaScript |
Syncs to JS bridge / app state |
Free |
RN-specific; instrumentation required |
Use this table as a map. The sections below follow the same rhythm as typical insights pieces: what it is, where it runs, how you author tests, how it fights flakiness, and what it costs.
Appium vs native stacks: pros and cons (short)
Appium keeps a single cross-platform model and mirrors Selenium skills. Cost is complexity: capabilities, drivers, timeouts, and locator churn across Compose, SwiftUI, WebViews, and OS dialogs.
Espresso and XCUITest trade portability for speed and stability on one OS. They are usually the right default inside platform-native teams that already live in Android Studio or Xcode.
Alternatives below change the authoring model (YAML, English), the execution model (gray-box, vision), or lean native for maximum per-OS stability.
1. FinalRun
FinalRun is an open-source (Apache 2.0) CLI-oriented approach to mobile UI testing where you describe flows in natural language and a vision + LLM stack drives simulators and emulators (and can align with your device strategy as you configure it). It is aimed at teams who want less time fixing selectors when product and design move weekly.
Targets native and cross-platform mobile UIs the same way a user sees them — by pixels and semantics — so Flutter, React Native, SwiftUI, UIKit, and Jetpack Compose are all in scope from a “does it render on screen?” perspective. Exact matrix should match your repo’s supported runners; see the finalrun-agent repository.
Test authoring
Tests are YAML with plain-English steps (tap, scroll, type, handle permissions). That keeps specs readable for devs and QA without maintaining a parallel layer of XPath-style locators for every screen change.
AI coding agents (Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, …)
If you already ship mobile features with an AI coding agent, FinalRun is designed to slot into the same loop as your editor — similar to how the city guides describe it for Android and iOS: install once, then drive tests from natural-language commands instead of context-switching to a separate QA toolchain.
Install (or ask your agent to run the installer from the finalrun-agent repo):
curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/final-run/finalrun-agent/main/scripts/install.sh | bash
Generate tests from your codebase — your agent can use the bundled skills to read the project, infer bundle ID / package name, scaffold .finalrun config, and write YAML specs under feature folders:
/finalrun-generate-test Generate tests for login — valid login, wrong password, and logout
Run tests and auto-fix failures — the agent executes the suite, inspects screenshots, video, and logs, decides whether the fix belongs in app code or the test spec, applies a minimal change, and re-runs until green:
/finalrun-test-and-fix Verify the checkout flow end-to-end
That workflow — generate → run → triage → fix without leaving the agent — is what makes FinalRun feel lightweight next to traditional Appium setups, especially for teams that already live in Cursor-style sessions.
Flakiness and maintenance
Trade-off is explicit: you reduce locator fragility and gain adaptability when labels and layouts shift, while accepting LLM variability and the need for clear steps and review of runs (reports, screenshots, traces). It complements — rather than clones — WebDriver semantics.
Pricing
Framework: open source. Operational cost: your compute, CI minutes, and model API usage as applicable. No proprietary license required to adopt the CLI workflow.
2. Maestro
Maestro is an open-source tool built around declarative YAML flows for iOS and Android. It is often chosen when teams want readable tests, fast iteration, and less ceremony than a full Appium grid.
iOS and Android: simulators and emulators; Android physical devices are commonly used locally. Physical iOS constraints have historically pushed teams toward cloud or third-party device farms for some setups — confirm current docs for your release.
Scripting language
YAML flows: launch app, tap, assert text, scroll — optimized for clarity. Flows are interpreted, which supports quick edits without a compile step.
Visual / IDE support
Maestro Studio (desktop) helps author and run flows outside a raw terminal workflow, depending on your comfort level.
Flakiness handling
Maestro emphasizes practical stability: implicit waiting and tolerance so tests are less dependent on manual sleep() tuning — a common pain in raw driver scripts.
Pricing
Core: free and open source for local CLI and Studio-style workflows. Maestro Cloud and enterprise offerings add hosted execution, scale, and org features; pricing changes over time, so use maestro.dev for current numbers.
3. Espresso
Espresso is Google’s in-house Android UI testing framework, tightly integrated with Android Studio.
Android only — emulators and devices. Deep hooks into the Android UI thread.
Scripting language
Java or Kotlin test code, often colocated with the app module. Fast feedback for Android specialists.
Flakiness handling
Uses UI thread synchronization and idling resources so actions run when the UI is actually ready — a major reliability win on Android.
Pricing
Free as part of Android tooling. Real cost is engineering time to write and maintain tests.
4. XCUITest
XCUITest is Apple’s standard UI automation framework for iOS, embedded in Xcode.
iOS simulators and physical devices. Not applicable to Android.
Scripting language
Swift or Objective-C. Ideal when your team already ships iOS features in Xcode daily.
Flakiness handling
Native instrumentation and accessibility-aware element queries yield stable tests when identifiers and view state are well managed.
Pricing
Included with Xcode. Hardware and Apple developer program costs apply as usual.
5. Detox
Detox is a gray-box, open-source framework aimed at React Native apps, with strong synchronization to the RN runtime.
React Native on iOS and Android. Not a general-purpose choice for non-RN native codebases.
Scripting language
JavaScript (or TypeScript in typical setups), aligned with RN developer skills.
Flakiness handling
Syncs to app state (animations, network work, bridge traffic) to avoid racing ahead of the UI — a frequent source of flakes in RN.
Pricing
Open source and free; cost is setup and maintenance.
Advantages and disadvantages
FinalRun reduces locator-heavy maintenance and keeps specs in human-readable YAML, at the cost of a non-WebDriver execution model and LLM operational considerations.
Maestro delivers ** approachable YAML** and practical stability for mobile flows with a mature OSS story; advanced edge cases may still push you toward native or code-first stacks.
Espresso and XCUITest maximize per-platform reliability and speed; the disadvantage is split suites for cross-platform products.
Detox is hard to beat for React Native timing issues; it is the wrong hammer for fully native Android/iOS apps outside RN.
| Tool |
Best when… |
Watch out for… |
| FinalRun |
Fast UI change, fewer selectors, English-first specs |
LLM ops; not a Selenium port |
| Maestro |
YAML-first mobile automation without Appium overhead |
Complex scenarios needing deep hooks |
| Espresso |
Android-only teams in Android Studio |
No iOS |
| XCUITest |
iOS-first teams in Xcode |
No Android |
| Detox |
React Native |
RN-only |
Conclusion
Choosing an alternative starts with what you ship: fully native (Kotlin/Swift), React Native, or cross-platform UI (Flutter, RN, etc.) that still renders as a mobile app. Then weigh team skills (Kotlin, Swift, JS, YAML), budget (OSS vs cloud), and maintenance (locators vs declarative vs vision).
Cross-platform YAML without Appium’s stack: Maestro is a strong peer benchmark.
Platform-native speed: Espresso / XCUITest.
React Native: Detox.
Minimal locator churn and plain-English automation: FinalRun.
Budget: Espresso, XCUITest, Detox, Maestro’s core, and FinalRun’s OSS layers avoid proprietary tooling licenses; cloud and LLM usage still have operating costs.
Complexity: Declarative and vision-first tools favor maintainability; low-level instrumentation favors control.
FAQs
What should I look for when replacing or complementing Appium?
Start with platform coverage (iOS, Android, emulators vs devices), how tests are authored (code vs YAML vs English), CI fit, and total cost of ownership including flakes and rewrites — not just license price.
Is FinalRun a drop-in Appium replacement?
No. It targets the same outcomes (ship quality mobile software) with a different execution and authoring model. Pilot on one critical flow, then expand.
How does vision-based testing differ from Maestro-style YAML?
Both can use YAML. Maestro drives UIs with its flow engine and platform integration. FinalRun emphasizes vision + language models to interpret screens with less reliance on traditional selectors — different trade-offs for stability vs determinism.
What about cost?
Appium-class stacks are free at the framework level; you pay in setup and maintenance. Cloud devices, parallelization, and LLM usage add variable monthly cost depending on volume.
Explore FinalRun on GitHub, read the docs at finalrun.app, and join the Slack community.