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

"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"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 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."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool; it covers all necessary items in the test plan and is very useful from all perspectives."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"With TestComplete, we need just eight hours (or even less if we're using multiple machines) for stability and stress testing, whereas manual tests would take 48 hours."
"The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality; it quickly detects any changes in the UI."
"In all projects where I participated it helped significantly improve and speed up regression testing, which is usually bottleneck before release."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The integration with various tools is important."
 

Cons

"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"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."
"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."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"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 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."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"It is expensive, and it is difficult to acquire living in Brazil. They should facilitate this."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"It is very difficult to have multiple developers when using Name Mapping. You can’t merge all the files and this creates conflicts."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The initial deployment of TestComplete was difficult, but with the assistance of SmartBear technical support, I was able to get it up and running."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
 

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."
"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."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
892,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
6%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
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.
892,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.