"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."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"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."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."
"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."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"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."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"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."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 5th in Test Automation Tools with 13 reviews while Tricentis qTest is ranked 4th in Test Management Tools with 1 review. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 8.0, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis qTest writes "Great for test management and automates a lot of the testing functions". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, Micro Focus UFT One and Appium, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, Zephyr Enterprise, TestRail by Gurock and Visual Studio Test Professional. 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.
