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

SmartBear TestComplete vs Zephyr Enterprise 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)
Zephyr Enterprise
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (7th)
 

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 6.0%, up 5.9% compared to last year.
Zephyr Enterprise, on the other hand, focuses on Test Management Tools, holds 5.2% mindshare, down 7.8% since last year.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete6.0%
Tricentis Tosca11.4%
OpenText Functional Testing6.8%
Other75.8%
Test Automation Tools
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zephyr Enterprise5.2%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail6.3%
Other79.1%
Test Management 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
Integration with tool streamlines test management but needs better exporting options
I use it for test management within Jira This tool boasts an incredibly user-friendly interface that integrates seamlessly with other Jira tools. I particularly appreciate its intuitive features for designing test plans, creating test cases, and executing test cycles. Some areas for improvement,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is mainly stable."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"TestComplete fits almost almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications, making it an amazing feature for companies that want to automate UI tests on each application built in-house."
"The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts."
"It is value for money, and different licensing options are available."
"The solution has saved a lot of human resources by running full regression tests prior to each release, and over the years many major bugs have been detected by the tool, saving us the big expense of fixing problems after a release."
"We already have the UI smoke test and have integrated to our build system, which runs each day for multiple versions of the product and saves us a lot of time."
"At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"It has integration with test automation tools."
"Now, we are getting consolidated reports in one place, we have all our metrics and repository together, and this is helpful."
"The solution does its job well."
"It has a very intuitive user experience."
"It has many features, but the main things that we need are the test cycles and integration with automation because we have automation for the web and mobile applications. We use it for test case management to run the test cases and get the results. At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements. We are able to get the test execution report and the test pass and fail report. This summary is delivered to our management."
"Zephyr really improves the testing of the product on many levels - planning, test case creation, automation goals, test reporting, and verification of the testing."
 

Cons

"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 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."
"The tool sometimes seems a little unstable and crashes sometimes on Windows 10."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete."
"Memory consumption Speed of interaction with controls Sets of prepared libraries like asserts Templates of tests from scratch"
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Creating better default varieties of reporting would make the product much better and more popular."
"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting."
"Additionally, they could improve the daily reporting. It does generate reports, but they are screen based reports."
"We would like support for the agile and behavior-driven development (BDD) approaches."
"The only thing I have missed is an easy way to configure showing the latest execution results of all test cases linked in JIRA (story/epic), thus, receiving the state of a feature."
"We have a lot of automation for our products, and we require a utility for its integration with automation. Currently, we have to write this utility ourselves. It would be great if they can provide such a utility."
"We faced some errors while uploading the test cases."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"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."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"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."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"It costs a couple of thousand dollars for a little more than 125 users, per month."
"DFS is more expensive than Zephyr. DFS is around $32 per person, whereas Zephyr is $10 per person. There is a major difference in the price, which is the main reason why we are trying to shift to Zephyr."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
892,943 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
6%
Construction Company
5%
 

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 Business2
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
 

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...
What needs improvement with Zephyr Enterprise?
Some areas for improvement, include its export capabilities. Exporting test cases, especially those with screenshots or attachments, can be cumbersome, hindering easy sharing and scalability.
What advice do you have for others considering Zephyr Enterprise?
I would recommend it mainly for manual testing and test management. Within Zephyrscale, they also have automated testing, however, I would recommend it only for test management. The overall rating ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SmartBear Zephyr
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Hyundai, Fujitsu, Google, David Jones, Burger King, Ingenico, Websense, Dow Jones, Harris, Saab
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Zephyr Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
892,943 professionals have used our research since 2012.