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

"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."
"After TestComplete, we have been able to reduce that time to less than one week."
"Such anticipation, preparation and workarounds are the way to ‘Doing it right, with TestComplete’."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"SmartBear TestComplete performs some self-healing and has a feature called OCR (optical character recognition)."
"Regressions and Smoke was done manually in the past, which has been replaced by Automated Testing."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The product is easy to use."
"The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."
"It enabled us to cover our app in end-to-end tests very quickly with quality results."
"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."
"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 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."
"The Testim technical support is very responsive and worked with a specific team member on the First Databank side to answer hard technical questions and took enhancement requests as needed."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."
 

Cons

"Some of the objects/parent objects are dynamically created in the web page. During the test, TestComplete will have problem to identify these kind of objects."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"Sometimes, TestComplete crashes when attempting to delete over 10 logs."
"TestComplete had problems during long hours runs. In some cases it could crash without leaving any logs."
"The initial deployment of TestComplete was difficult, but with the assistance of SmartBear technical support, I was able to get it up and running."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."
"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."
"Faster scripting would be beneficial, as test creation is faster now."
"There is currently no room for improvement that I can identify as of now."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."
"The solution is not expensive."
"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,277 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software 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: June 2026.
900,277 professionals have used our research since 2012.