No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Adaptavist Test Management ...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (12th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.0%, down 2.8% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 6.0% mindshare, up 5.9% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.0%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail6.3%
Other82.3%
Test Management Tools
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete6.0%
Tricentis Tosca11.4%
OpenText Functional Testing6.8%
Other75.8%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."
"It is a scalable solution."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."
"Good test coverage through automation and provides unique solutions to most of the automation challenges (e.g. comparison of images)."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"After NPAPI was unsupported by Chrome, our test runs were halted on Chrome for a previous version of TestComplete, and they started running again with version 11.11."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"Selenium integration."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"Such anticipation, preparation and workarounds are the way to ‘Doing it right, with TestComplete’."
 

Cons

"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"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."
"This tool is also very expensive compared to the similar tools in the market. Price needs to be affordable."
"The integration tools could 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."
"TestComplete had problems during long hours runs. In some cases it could crash without leaving any logs."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"I have used it for Web Application automation and sometimes find difficulties while recognizing dynamically-generated runtime object."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slig...
What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manua...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
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.
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.