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

IBM DevOps Test UI 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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.0%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.0%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Other93.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
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

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester, which analyzes the changes in UI elements and allows me to automatically adapt and change my automation testing."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"Test automation with TestComplete significantly (estimated 80%) reduced the regression timeline for a complex AUT with a large number of test cases."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"Good test coverage through automation and provides unique solutions to most of the automation challenges (e.g. comparison of images)."
"Valuable for us is the ability to identify objects by using Find methods."
"Technical support is excellent, and if you reach out to them, they will get back to you within 24 hours."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
 

Cons

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"More APIs could be added."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"Occasionally, image comparison results in failures, possibly due to issues with resolution or font size on the server side, which can be challenging to identify."
"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."
"The web testing framework of TestComplete is not very helpful for an Automation Engineer; it requires the same effort as Selenium, and in most cases, Selenium proves to be a better testing tool for web-based testing."
"Some of the objects/parent objects are dynamically created in the web page. During the test, TestComplete will have problem to identify these kind of objects."
"One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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 price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"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 license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
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...
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.