We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Testim 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."The solution has a very nice interface."
"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."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"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 reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"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."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."
"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."
"The product is easy to use."
"Testim introduces three services covering validation steps, eliminating the necessity to write complex code."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"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."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"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."
"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)."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"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."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 72 reviews while Testim is ranked 17th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while Testim is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Testim writes "A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish, whereas Testim is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Functionize, Testsigma and Perfecto. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Testim report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.