We performed a comparison between ACCELQ Automate and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."
"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The pricing is the constraint."
ACCELQ Automate is ranked 19th in Test Automation Tools with 1 review while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews. ACCELQ Automate is rated 9.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ACCELQ Automate writes "Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". ACCELQ Automate is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Eggplant Test, Functionize and Testsigma, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.