Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Adaptavist Test Management ...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (13th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.3%, down 2.5% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 6.1% mindshare, up 6.0% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.3%
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
Tricentis qTest7.8%
Other81.7%
Test Management Tools
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete6.1%
Tricentis Tosca13.4%
OpenText Functional Testing6.5%
Other74.0%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Lead at Emerson
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is a scalable solution."
"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"We already have the UI smoke test and have integrated to our build system, which runs each day for multiple versions of the product and saves us a lot of time."
"The initial set-up was exceedingly simple."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"This product is quite mature, able to compete with other products in the market, and I would highly recommend it."
"TestComplete replaced QTP as the preferred choice of tool for the organization; it is much faster, works better across technologies (especially Flex-based UI), and is better compatible with newer technologies directly out of the box."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
 

Cons

"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."
"I have used it for Web Application automation and sometimes find difficulties while recognizing dynamically-generated runtime object."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"There is no qualified support for different web UI frameworks and no V8 support as well."
"I pay for support and maintenance; having used the “support” functions through online forums, I can say there is room for improvement."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."
"It comes with a high cost."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Performing Arts
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slig...
What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manua...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.