We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Telerik Test Studio 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 helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"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 is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"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."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"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)."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 71 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0. 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 Telerik Test Studio writes "Very good performance and load testing capabilities". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Bitbar, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Ranorex Studio, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca and Visual Studio Test Professional. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Telerik Test Studio report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression 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.