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

"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality; it quickly detects any changes in the UI."
"Object Browser is the most powerful feature."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"TestComplete is much more flexible, light, and easy to use."
"Price-wise, feature-wise, its ability to integrate with other products, and of course, scalability-wise, it's great."
"In all projects where I participated it helped significantly improve and speed up regression testing, which is usually bottleneck before release."
"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."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"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."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
 

Cons

"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"Customer Service can be slow to respond to electronic forms of communication and they do not have a way for a customer to speak directly to customer support."
"This tool is also very expensive compared to the similar tools in the market. Price needs to be affordable."
"When it comes to customization controls the scalability of SmartBear TestComplete is limited."
"There often are issues with web test execution."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"The solution doesn't have a very flexible pricing model."
"The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"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 charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"We have not seen a return on investment yet."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"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."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"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."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"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.
896,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
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: April 2026.
896,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.