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

BrowserStack vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.7%, down from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.0%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users
I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
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 speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"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 integration with various tools is important."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"Selenium integration."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
 

Cons

"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"We had some execution issues."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"The price is fine."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"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."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things...
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

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
860,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.