We performed a comparison between Inflectra Rapise and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."It's pretty straightforward to set up."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility."
"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"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 ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"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."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The maintenance is very difficult. We've only been using the platform for three months, so I'm not sure if that will continue, but right now it's an observation I've had."
"It would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and automation integration."
"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability."
"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."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
Inflectra Rapise is ranked 22nd in Test Automation Tools with 7 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews. Inflectra Rapise is rated 7.2, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Inflectra Rapise writes "The tool needs to improve in the areas of security, though it is a versatile product". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". Inflectra Rapise is most compared with Katalon Studio, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.