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

ConformIQ Creator vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

ConformIQ Creator
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (22nd), Test Design Automation (3rd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (21st)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (5th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. ConformIQ Creator is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, down 1.3% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 6.3% mindshare, down 7.7% since last year.
Test Management Tools
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1518657 - PeerSpot reviewer
Feature-rich stable tool with multiple options to control output, good integration with other tools, and knowledgeable support team
The core functionality of the tool is automated test generation of optimized test suite; the tool has extensive list of options for the same. The product's integration with other tools sets it apart. It has integrations with many upstream (for requirements mapping) and downstream (export of test cases to various tools) products. It is like "plug-and-play". For any customized downstream tool, like our proprietary automation framework, support is provided for custom development. It is has features - Business AD - to use in Agile implementations. The latest version seems to have support for BDD/Gherkin as well, which we have not used much.
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

"The tool has the ability to integrate with various requirement management, test management, and version control tools."
"Though optimized and automated test generation is the core functionality, the product's integration with other tools sets it apart."
"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."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"Selenium integration."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
 

Cons

"I would like to see the output data optionally used as input for the model, as further action in the flow."
"It would be helpful to have a feature in the tool's UI to map object locators within the system."
"Even though the 4.1 version is a far-improved version from its earlier avatars, the performance of test generation is still an issue on real-time models we have."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"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)."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"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."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Logistics Company
5%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
 

Also Known As

Conformiq Creator, Conformiq Transformer
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alcatel-Lucent, Avaya, Daimler, Ericsson
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.