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

CrossBrowserTesting 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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.9%
CrossBrowserTesting1.0%
Other94.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
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

"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."
"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The integration with various tools is important."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts."
 

Cons

"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very 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."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"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'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.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.