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
14th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
10th
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 August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.7%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Testim is 1.9%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.7%
Testim1.9%
Other93.4%
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

"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."
"The automation has improved over time, allowing it to integrate with other external tools for defect tracking."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"Even with my limited programming knowledge, I was able to create automation tests using the Keyword Test feature."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"The initial set-up was exceedingly simple."
"Possibility of the automated testing, installing plugins and extensions, data-driven testing and debugger."
"The product is easy to use."
"I have seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes."
"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."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"The feature I like most about Testim is the record and playback capability, which does not require writing a lot of code."
"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."
"It enabled us to cover our app in end-to-end tests very quickly with quality results."
 

Cons

"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"I have used it for Web Application automation and sometimes find difficulties while recognizing dynamically-generated runtime object."
"Right now, in terms of recording and scripting the solution is not user-friendly."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"The level of technical support leaves a lot to be desired."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"In the last couple of months, I have experienced some downtime where it wasn't working."
"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."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind, for instance - instead of going in and out of the editor every time I want to view test data for a test, I could just view the test data in the table, or the ability to copy steps through tests."
"There is currently no room for improvement that I can identify as of now."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."
"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."
"The solution is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

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: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.