Comparison of three major javascript unit testing frameworks

qUnit

Pros:

• Lots of support across the board, from Q&A to CI server support

Cons:

• Lacks fluent syntax
• Configuration is a headache, and must constantly be maintained
• Makes including 3rd party libraries (like assertion libraries) relatively difficult
• Asynchronous testing can be a bit of a headache
• No baked-in headless run support

Jasmine

Pros:

• Simple setup for node through jasmine-node
• Headless running out of the box
• Nice fluent syntax for assertions built-in, and does play pretty well with other assertion libraries
• Supported by many CI servers (TeamCity, Codeship, etc.) and some that don't support natively have plugins (jenkins has a maven plugin)
• Descriptive syntax for BDD paradigm

Cons:

• Asynchronous testing can be a bit of a headache
• Expects a specific suffix to all test files (*spec.js by default)

Mocha

Pros:

• Simple setup
• Headless running out of the box
• Allows use of any assertion library that will throw exceptions on failure, such as Chai
• Supported by some CI servers and plugins for others (jenkins has a maven plugin)
• Has aliases for functions to be more BDD-oriented or TDD-oriented
• Highly extensible
• Asynchronous testing is a breeze

Cons:

• Newer to the field, so support might be lacking in certain areas