We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite 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."Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"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 product has many features."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"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."
"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"What I like most about UiPath Test Suite is that it's straightforward, and any user who knows how to use the UiPath Studio can learn how to create a test script in as fast as thirty minutes. There's nothing new you must learn to use UiPath Test Suite because it only has three sections: Given, Then, and When."
"It's useful for automating tasks."
"It is a very scalable product."
"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."
"The document understanding is good."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"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."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"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."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
"UiPath needs to improve its Test Manager feature. Defect management and reporting also need improvement."
"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."
"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."
"The product releases sometimes have issues."
"UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestLeft, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, froglogic Squish and Opkey. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
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.
