Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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 (10th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th), 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 2.7%, down 3.4% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 5.9% mindshare, down 7.4% since last year.
Test Management Tools
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
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
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

"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"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."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"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 ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"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."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"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."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"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."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"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."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"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."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
38%
Computer Software Company
26%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.
 

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.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.