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 (10th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th), 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 2.8%, down 3.4% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 5.9% mindshare, down 6.6% since last year.
Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.8%
Tricentis qTest14.6%
OpenText Application Quality Management12.7%
Other69.9%
Test Management Tools
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.9%
Tricentis Tosca20.8%
OpenText Functional Testing8.9%
Other64.4%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
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
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

"The program is very stable and scalable."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"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."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"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."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,783 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
36%
Computer Software Company
29%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Performing Arts
4%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
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.
867,783 professionals have used our research since 2012.