SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis qTest comparison

The compared SmartBear and Tricentis solutions aren't in the same category. SmartBear is ranked #6 in TAt , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 5.9% mindshare in the category. Tricentis is ranked #3 in TMT , with an average rating of 8.3, and holds a 15.1% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

SmartBear TestComplete

Read 76 SmartBear TestComplete reviews

4,476 Views
3,402 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 18 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,871 Views
1,328 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

SmartBear TestComplete

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: July 2020).

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2020

Download the complete report

Helped 865,484 peers since 2012

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

SmartBear TestComplete

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (9th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)

Tricentis qTest

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. SmartBear TestComplete is designed for Test Automation Tools and holds a mindshare of 5.9%, down 6.7% compared to last year.
Tricentis qTest, on the other hand, focuses on Test Management Tools, holds 15.1% mindshare, up 12.5% since last year.

Test Automation Tools

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Prakhar Goel

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.

Read full review

SamuLehikoinen

Partner Manager at Agiilit Oy

Efficient and collaborative software testing providing comprehensive test management capabilities, seamless integration with various tools and impressive manual regression testing features

The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall experience with the tool was positive. When you begin integrating your testing tools with qTest, the available examples may not be very clear, and I believe this is an area that could be enhanced, particularly in terms of providing clearer integration guidance. While the tool's integration with various testing tools is impressive, there is room for improvement in showcasing more cases and benefits, especially through additional videos and documentation.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."

"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."

"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."

"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."

"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."

"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."

More SmartBear TestComplete pros

"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."

"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

"The JIRA integration is really important to us because it allows our business analysts to see test results inside the JIRA ticket and that we have met the definition of "done," and have made sure we tested to the requirements of the story."

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."

"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

"The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well."

"The self-healing aspects and maintenance of scripts are much faster and quicker, and we are able to find better avenues and better productivity in terms of maintenance, which we can pass on to the customer."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."

"The integration tools could be better."

"Right now, the product only supports Windows."

"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."

"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."

"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."

"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."

"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."

More SmartBear TestComplete cons

"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."

"For UFT to Tosca migration, scripts need to be rewritten as there are no automatic converters available."

"The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved."

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."

"Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is becoming more and more expensive."

"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."

"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."

"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."

"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."

"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."

"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."

"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."

More SmartBear TestComplete pricing and cost advice

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

The solution is expensive. For the features that are available, depending on the volumes of licenses we get, we are able to get better discounts as strategic partners of Tosca. We can pass some ben...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Customers are moving towards Tricentis due to their association with SAP. There is interest in understanding if there are connectors for converting UFT scripts to Tosca, as many customers are looki...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 20% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 11% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 9% of the time

Qt Squish vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 8% of the time

Katalon Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 8% of the time

More SmartBear TestComplete Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 33% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 25% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete

March 2025

Download SmartBear TestComplete product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

July 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Overview

What is SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete is a reliable, sturdy automated testing platform created by SmartBear Software. SmartBear Software is a worldwide technological leader known for developing quality enterprise-class development and testing solutions.

TestComplete simplifies the process of creating tests for numerous applications, including, but not limited to; Desktop, Android, IOS, Web browsers, and Windows. Application tests can be manual, scripted, and even recorded by using keyword-driven or data-driven functionality. There are even additional options for error reporting and automated playback. The object repository is extremely accurate and is fully customizable. TestComplete can easily be used by experienced developers and even by manual novice testers to develop quality automated UI tests quickly.

TestComplete offers three different testing scenarios:

Desktop: Users can easily and quickly automate UI tests using today’s most popular desktop applications, such as; Windows, Java, Python,.Net, VBScript, and more.
Web: Users can effortlessly create renewable tests for all of today’s popular web applications, including JavaScript frameworks on 2000+ trusted browser and platform integrations.
Mobile: Users can safely build and automate serviceable UI tests on actual or virtual android or IOS devices, locally or in the cloud. Users can create code or codeless tests. TestComplete seamlessly integrates with many of today’s popular frameworks.

Key Features

Easily create automated UI tests: TestComplete offers scriptless Record and Replay or simple keyword-driven tests to quickly develop any type of UI test users may require. Tests can be recorded once, then replayed when needed across various applications on mobile, web, or desktop environments. TestComplete integrates with many different languages, such as Java, Python, C+, and more.
Keyword driven tests: Users can easily divide testing steps, actions, objects, and data with an integrated keyword-driven test structure. This makes it easy for every user to participate in the test automation process; there is no programming experience needed. Everything is made simple with easy-to-use point-and-click options.
Data driven tests: Easily distinguish data from test commands to keep administrative efforts simple. Users can improve overall coverage by running various automated mobile, desktop, or web UI tests.
Record and Replay: Users can reuse created automated tests across every environment as often as desired. This helps to expand overall test coverage and represents a huge cost and time savings.

Reviews from Real Users

Sandhiya T S., Sr Solutions Engineer at Lexington Soft, relates, “The record and replay aspects of the solution are quite useful for people. With them, you don't have to write any scripts. Basically, you can record your actions and play them back later. The initial setup is also very easy.”

Sai S R., Staff Test Architect at a tech services company, says, "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."

SmartBear

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2020

Free Report: SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest report.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.