No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Functionize 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

Functionize
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
16th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Functionize is 1.3%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.8%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.8%
Functionize1.3%
Other92.9%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2541093 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Provides efficient test automation for web applications and has good technical support services
The platform's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process. Vision AI enhances image recognition capabilities, improving the accuracy and efficiency of visual testing. The audit trail feature helps track changes and maintain compliance, which is particularly important in regulated industries. Smart fix automatically resolves issues, reducing manual intervention, while the self-healing feature ensures that test cases remain accurate and functional, even when system changes occur.
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

"The platform's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process."
"It helped to automate all the possible functional test cases which I previously used to do by manual testing."
"I changed because I did not have any solutions as close to the real thing as this."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"It is value for money, and different licensing options are available."
"This application is helping a lot in regression testing."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"My advice to others is: If you're looking for speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results, go get TestComplete."
 

Cons

"The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"I can sense there's still a little bit more room for improvement in terms of making the whole testing process easier."
"Technical support can be improved by being more efficient in responding to questions."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
"The level of technical support leaves a lot to be desired."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"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 solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,456 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
5%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

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 Functionize?
The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles.
What needs improvement with Functionize?
The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility.
What is your primary use case for Functionize?
We use the product to transition customers from manual to automated testing, particularly for web applications. It involves reducing team sizes, accelerating testing strategies, and providing speci...
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...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete?
We are using SmartBear TestComplete ( /products/smartbear-testcomplete-reviews ) for automation over applications.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salesforce, Mastercard, Google, HP Enterprise, Cisco, Farmers Insurance, The General
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: June 2026.
902,456 professionals have used our research since 2012.