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

SmartBear TestComplete vs SmartBear TestLeft comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
SmartBear TestLeft
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
34th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.8%, down from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestLeft is 0.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
reviewer1378161 - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple to set up and the test execute feature is helpful, but the cost could be reduced
Our primary use case is Point of Sale (POS) testing The most valuable features are test executor and development. TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved. We have been using SmartBear TestLeft for the past month. Stability-wise, TestLeft is…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The product has many features."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable features are test executor and development."
 

Cons

"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."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"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."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"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 cost should be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
29%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
American Red Cross, CISCO, HONDA, ADIDAS, TBC bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, BrowserStack and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.