We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Visual Studio Test Professional 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."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."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"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 reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"The user interface is very friendly."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
"The tool is flexible and easy to manage. We use it since it is scalable and easy to use. It integrates with solutions."
"Performance-wise, it is a great tool."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a very scalable solution."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"The solution is very stable; there's nothing in relation to stability to complain about."
"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."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"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."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
"The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier."
"Visual Studio Test Professional could improve by having better integration with external databases."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"The data flow can be improved."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
"The interface should be made attractive."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 70 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText UFT One and Katalon Studio. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.