We performed a comparison between LEAPWORK and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It provides automated testing. Instead of us doing manual testing, we can utilize Leapwork, and it tests most of our critical processes. In the next phase, we also plan to do some process work with it, such as using Leapwork to create reports or provide certain extracts of data."
"The most valuable of this solution is the no code option. It offers drag and drop when it comes to development and removes the need for a developer."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"The initial setup is difficult."
"The only thing that I don't like about the product is the need to deploy agents on the laptops of people doing the testing. So, you have an agent on a server, then you have an agent on the laptop of the person who is doing the testing, and that seems like a lot of stuff and a kind of anti-cloud. Why do I have to deploy agents on people's machines in order to do something in the cloud? I'm sure they're doing that so they can monitor their licensing and all that stuff, but it is not necessarily a friendly process."
"This solution could be improved by offering better reporting related to the integration into Azure DevOps."
"It is a very comprehensive tool, and there is a significant learning curve to being able to adopt the tool. Because it does so much, there is only so much that you can learn. You can, however, do some simpler things right away. They do have a kind of boot camp where some of their experts engage with you, and during that time, you can work on the top initiatives that you want to do, and that's a good process. After you start using the tool, there is a lot more that you would want to do."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"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."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
"The integration tools could be better."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
LEAPWORK is ranked 17th in Test Automation Tools with 3 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews. LEAPWORK is rated 7.6, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of LEAPWORK writes "The product has a user-friendly UI, and it provides good support, but it is expensive and difficult to setup". 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". LEAPWORK is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Katalon Studio and Avo Assure, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestLeft. See our LEAPWORK vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.