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

SmartBear TestComplete vs SmartBear TestLeft 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

SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
SmartBear TestLeft
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
35th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestLeft is 0.3%, down 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

"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"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."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The most valuable features are test executor and development."
 

Cons

"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"The integration tools could be better."
"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."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"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 cost should be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
841,540 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
28%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

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?
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.
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: March 2025.
841,540 professionals have used our research since 2012.