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

Functionize 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

Functionize
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
17th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Functionize is 1.2%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.6%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.6%
Functionize1.2%
Other93.2%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2541093 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Provides efficient test automation for web applications and has good technical support services
The platform's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process. Vision AI enhances image recognition capabilities, improving the accuracy and efficiency of visual testing. The audit trail feature helps track changes and maintain compliance, which is particularly important in regulated industries. Smart fix automatically resolves issues, reducing manual intervention, while the self-healing feature ensures that test cases remain accurate and functional, even when system changes occur.
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

"The platform's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process."
"I used different solution afterwards and I can say there is no other product with such great flexibility."
"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."
"Technical support is excellent, and if you reach out to them, they will get back to you within 24 hours."
"The Object Spy has surpassed any other "spy" tools I have ever used."
"I tell people it is cheaper than ALM with the same features and better UI."
"It's a really good product with minimal issues."
"If a company has an ecosystem and they need to automate the web, desktop, or mobile, then TestComplete is the right tool."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
 

Cons

"The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"Sometimes the app crashes during test execution based on the amount of code that is running."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"TestComplete had problems during long hours runs. In some cases it could crash without leaving any logs."
"Some of the objects/parent objects are dynamically created in the web page. During the test, TestComplete will have problem to identify these kind of objects."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"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 option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
907,816 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
5%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

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 Functionize?
The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles.
What needs improvement with Functionize?
The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility.
What is your primary use case for Functionize?
We use the product to transition customers from manual to automated testing, particularly for web applications. It involves reducing team sizes, accelerating testing strategies, and providing speci...
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...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete?
We are using SmartBear TestComplete ( /products/smartbear-testcomplete-reviews ) for automation over applications.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salesforce, Mastercard, Google, HP Enterprise, Cisco, Farmers Insurance, The General
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: July 2026.
907,816 professionals have used our research since 2012.