We performed a comparison between Adaptavist Test Management for Jira and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"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."
"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."
"The product has many features."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"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."
More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 13th in Test Management Tools with 4 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.2, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "Integrates with any automation tool, but the granular reporting feature should be more intuitive ". 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". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
We monitor all Test Management 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.