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

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
23rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.9%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.9%
Telerik Test Studio1.9%
Other93.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Project Management at Capgemini
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Price-wise, feature-wise, its ability to integrate with other products, and of course, scalability-wise, it's great."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool, and it also has valuable regression testing."
"The product has many features."
"After TestComplete, we have been able to reduce that time to less than one week."
"With TestComplete, we need just eight hours (or even less if we're using multiple machines) for stability and stress testing, whereas manual tests would take 48 hours."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required."
"TestComplete replaced QTP as the preferred choice of tool for the organization; it is much faster, works better across technologies (especially Flex-based UI), and is better compatible with newer technologies directly out of the box."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The object repository is the most valuable feature, as different elements can be identified and reutilized through the repository across other scripts, and the product has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
 

Cons

"Often crashes with large projects. File check-in takes too much time in TFS."
"There is no support for mobile testing automation."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"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."
"It seems to crash once every two to three months."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"A test case design (schema) module would be nice."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"We have not seen a return on investment yet."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"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."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"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 pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
899,283 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
899,283 professionals have used our research since 2012.