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

SmartBear TestComplete vs TestProject [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
TestProject [EOL]
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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.
Ashu Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior quality analyst at Lalli
An easy-to-use tool that saves time and functions within a limited budget
The solution's reporting system should be clearer and easier to understand for a layperson. I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it. For a layperson, the solution should be easy to use. Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product. The product's current price should be lowered to attract potential customers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"Such anticipation, preparation and workarounds are the way to ‘Doing it right, with TestComplete’."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"For us, the automated test farm of 20 virtual machines for execution, 20 TestComplete licenses and 20 automated testers are doing the job of 100 manual testers."
"It's very helpful that, when you have a recording in one application, in one navigator, you can replay every step in different applications."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product; it also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."
"The script-less part of it was good for novice users."
"The ease of web and mobile functional testing is pretty easy on TestProject."
"One of the valuable features the solution offers is the chance to be able to perform automatic tests by recording, and to create them without having coding knowledge."
"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The product has a very good record-and-play functionality."
"Ability to carry out automatic testing without having coding knowledge."
 

Cons

"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"We did not maximize our ROI until we put somebody full-time on our TestComplete endeavours. The tool does have a learning curve, and it wasn't until we had an in-house expert on it that we began to see the benefits of automated testing over traditional QA roles."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The level of technical support leaves a lot to be desired."
"I can sense there's still a little bit more room for improvement in terms of making the whole testing process easier."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"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."
"Difficult trying to configure on more than one browser."
"A company would not be able to scale with just this solution."
"In an upcoming release, there should be a SaaS offering available."
"We'd like to see a direct cloud from TestProject instead of some other third party."
"I have had some difficulty trying to configure it on several browsers."
"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."
"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."
"I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"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 solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product...With TestProject, there is a need to pay a certain amount towards its licensing costs."
"The solution is free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
892,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
No data available
 

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 Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
IBM, Wix, Flir, Payoneer
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: April 2026.
892,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.