We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"Selenium integration."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"We had some execution issues."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"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."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"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 way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 72 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto and Tricentis Tosca, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our BrowserStack vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing 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.