SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis qTest comparison

The compared SmartBear and Tricentis solutions aren't in the same category. SmartBear is ranked #6 in TAt , with an average rating of 7.6, and holds a 6.5% mindshare in the category. Tricentis is ranked #6 in TMT , with an average rating of 8.7, and holds a 14.5% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

SmartBear TestComplete

Read 74 SmartBear TestComplete reviews

5,396 Views
3,862 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 16 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,669 Views
1,053 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

SmartBear TestComplete

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: July 2020).

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2020

Download the complete report

Helped 814,649 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

SmartBear TestComplete

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)

Tricentis qTest

Average Rating

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Management Tools (6th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. SmartBear TestComplete is designed for Test Automation Tools and holds a mindshare of 6.5%, down 7.9% compared to last year.
Tricentis qTest, on the other hand, focuses on Test Management Tools, holds 14.5% mindshare, up 10.0% since last year.

Test Automation Tools

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Prakhar Goel

Sr Test Lead at Emerson

Jun 25, 2024

Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation

We have applications related to power plants, and we use the solution to do 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…

Read full review

Sudipto Dey

Technical Lead at Linde

Jan 17, 2023

It doesn't require installation because you can use it through the URL; it's user-friendly and has an excellent reporting feature

The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better. There's a feature I want to document on the Tricentis Idea Portal for Tricentis qTest, which I hope to see in the next version of the tool. It's a feature available in Micro Focus where you execute a test, and then on a spec level, you mark it as pass or fail. Then at the overall level, Micro Focus will automatically mark the test as a pass if all steps passed or failed, even if one step failed. However, here in Tricentis qTest, you still need to mark the overall level of the test cases. It's not automated, unlike what you have in Micro Focus. If Tricentis adds that feature in Tricentis qTest, it will make life easier for testers.

Read full review

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."

"The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts."

"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."

"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."

"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."

"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."

"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)."

More SmartBear TestComplete pros

"I like the way it structures a project... We're able to put the test cases into qTest or modify something that's already there, so it's a reusable-type of environment. It is very important that we can do that and change our test data as needed..."

"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."

"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."

"The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself."

"The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

"Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer."

"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"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."

"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."

"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."

"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 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."

"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."

"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."

"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."

More SmartBear TestComplete cons

"As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."

"The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique."

"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."

"Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."

"The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."

More Tricentis qTest cons

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 solution's pricing is too high."

"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."

"The product is becoming more and more expensive."

"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."

"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."

"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."

"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."

More SmartBear TestComplete pricing and cost advice

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?

The solution's pricing is too high. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing nine and a half out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?

The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users.

See all answers

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall expe...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 21% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 10% of the time

Qt Squish vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 9% of the time

More SmartBear TestComplete Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 26% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 23% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 9% of the time

TFS vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete

October 2024

Download SmartBear TestComplete product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

October 2024

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Learn More

SmartBear

Tricentis

Overview

What is SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete is a reliable, sturdy automated testing platform created by SmartBear Software. SmartBear Software is a worldwide technological leader known for developing quality enterprise-class development and testing solutions.

TestComplete simplifies the process of creating tests for numerous applications, including, but not limited to; Desktop, Android, IOS, Web browsers, and Windows. Application tests can be manual, scripted, and even recorded by using keyword-driven or data-driven functionality. There are even additional options for error reporting and automated playback. The object repository is extremely accurate and is fully customizable. TestComplete can easily be used by experienced developers and even by manual novice testers to develop quality automated UI tests quickly.

TestComplete offers three different testing scenarios:

Desktop: Users can easily and quickly automate UI tests using today’s most popular desktop applications, such as; Windows, Java, Python,.Net, VBScript, and more.
Web: Users can effortlessly create renewable tests for all of today’s popular web applications, including JavaScript frameworks on 2000+ trusted browser and platform integrations.
Mobile: Users can safely build and automate serviceable UI tests on actual or virtual android or IOS devices, locally or in the cloud. Users can create code or codeless tests. TestComplete seamlessly integrates with many of today’s popular frameworks.

Key Features

Easily create automated UI tests: TestComplete offers scriptless Record and Replay or simple keyword-driven tests to quickly develop any type of UI test users may require. Tests can be recorded once, then replayed when needed across various applications on mobile, web, or desktop environments. TestComplete integrates with many different languages, such as Java, Python, C+, and more.
Keyword driven tests: Users can easily divide testing steps, actions, objects, and data with an integrated keyword-driven test structure. This makes it easy for every user to participate in the test automation process; there is no programming experience needed. Everything is made simple with easy-to-use point-and-click options.
Data driven tests: Easily distinguish data from test commands to keep administrative efforts simple. Users can improve overall coverage by running various automated mobile, desktop, or web UI tests.
Record and Replay: Users can reuse created automated tests across every environment as often as desired. This helps to expand overall test coverage and represents a huge cost and time savings.

Reviews from Real Users

Sandhiya T S., Sr Solutions Engineer at Lexington Soft, relates, “The record and replay aspects of the solution are quite useful for people. With them, you don't have to write any scripts. Basically, you can record your actions and play them back later. The initial setup is also very easy.”

Sai S R., Staff Test Architect at a tech services company, says, "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."

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2020

Free Report: SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.

DOWNLOAD NOW

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Tricentis qTest report.

We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.