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

BrowserStack vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 11.2%, up from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users
I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
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

"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"The integration is very good."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
 

Cons

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"We had some execution issues."
"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"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."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"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."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"The price is fine."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"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."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.
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

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.