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
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (21st), Test Management Tools (15th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
75
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 0.3%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
SmartBear TestComplete, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 6.2% mindshare, down 7.7% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

NC
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
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 most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The product has many features."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
 

Cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"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."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
825,399 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
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?
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

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: December 2024.
825,399 professionals have used our research since 2012.