We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have seen a return on investment."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution is scalable."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The product has many features."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"The integration tools could be better."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 23rd in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 6.8, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Easy to use and understand with multiple types of testing on offer". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Easy to learn with accurate recordings and good consistency". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, ReadyAPI Test and Micro Focus UFT One, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Micro Focus UFT One, Ranorex Studio and Appium. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
