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

SmartBear TestComplete vs Testim 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 Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th)
Testim
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
11th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Testim is 2.1%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.9%
Testim2.1%
Other93.0%
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.
JM
Director - Quality Engineering at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Smart locators and small learning curve streamline test automation, minimizing maintenance and boosting efficiency.
Testim has a specific feature called a smart locator. Anyone experienced in test automation knows this is one of the most complex parts of developing automated scripts. The Testim feature automatically finds the locators, which helps us build stable test scripts. Stable scripts are crucial for receiving faster and more reliable feedback. I have also seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes.

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."
"Customer Service: It's good. Technical Support: It's good."
"After NPAPI was unsupported by Chrome, our test runs were halted on Chrome for a previous version of TestComplete, and they started running again with version 11.11."
"If a company has an ecosystem and they need to automate the web, desktop, or mobile, then TestComplete is the right tool."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"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."
"Even with my limited programming knowledge, I was able to create automation tests using the Keyword Test feature."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"We primarily use the solution for business E2E testing, as it is fast and reliable, easy to maintain, and allows for the involvement of QA as well as Dev and BA."
"The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios."
"The stability has been great; we can add stable tests very easily and improve our automation coverage, which allows us to deploy a new version into production every few days with minimum manual labor."
"It enabled us to cover our app in end-to-end tests very quickly with quality results."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"The ease of learning and the small learning curve allowed us to scale the test scripts and the test suite quickly."
 

Cons

"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"The solution’s customer support should be improved."
"There is no support for mobile testing automation."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"The web testing framework of TestComplete is not very helpful for an Automation Engineer; it requires the same effort as Selenium, and in most cases, Selenium proves to be a better testing tool for web-based testing."
"LoadComplete could be a little more user-friendly, but is still better than LoginVSI."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it."
"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."
"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."
"Faster scripting would be beneficial, as test creation is faster now."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The solution is not expensive."
"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

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.
What needs improvement with Testim?
More advanced AI-based features and features on the API side would help us create better end-to-end test suites.
What is your primary use case for Testim?
As a Quality Engineering leader, I'm responsible for testing our 20-25 applications. Manual testing is becoming increasingly challenging due to their growing scope and complexity. We've been automa...
What advice do you have for others considering Testim?
Before diving into this tool, it's highly recommended to have a basic understanding of Selenium and JavaScript. The company provides excellent training courses for free, and I strongly suggest comp...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Testim and other solutions. Updated: May 2026.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.