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

PractiTest vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

PractiTest
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (21st), Test Management Tools (16th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. PractiTest is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 0.2%, down 0.3% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 6.5% mindshare, down 7.9% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

NC
Aug 29, 2017
Offers one click graphical dashboard reports and advanced customization
Integration with other platforms, Test Set schedule, custom filters, requirements linking with the test case, and the Dashboard are the most valuable features of this product. Just one click on the Dashboard and we get all reports in graphical format. Dashboards and reports are very customizable and the ability to share metrics with other colleagues is a great feature. Custom filters are really a big advantage of PractiTest. We have hundreds of tests and test sets that we can arrange properly and easily thanks to this tool. In addition, PractiTest offers a good reporting module and integration with other platforms such as JIRA, which we use daily. Advanced customization allows us to customize the tool's settings in accordance with all our needs. We integrated PractiTest with Pivotal Tracker and it allowed us to have everything synced on two systems and to make our testing process more professional.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 25, 2024
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
We have applications related to power plants, and we use the solution to do 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…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
 

Cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"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."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"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."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"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 pricing is pretty reasonable."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"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."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
10%
Retailer
9%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
The solution's pricing is too high. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing nine and a half out of ten.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: October 2024.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.