We performed a comparison between IBM Engineering Test Management 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."Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"RQM is something that we use everyday, so it has to be up and running, otherwise we would lose everything."
"Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product."
"The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"RQM's best features are integration with test automation and performance testing."
"It's very reliable as a solution."
"It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need. It has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability."
"Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage, so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert. That's the most important aspect."
"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 ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"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 are the desktop and mobile modules."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"Integration capabilities with other vendors' tools should improve."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach."
"Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"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."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"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."
More IBM Engineering Test Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Engineering Test Management is ranked 7th in Test Management Tools with 11 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 72 reviews. IBM Engineering Test Management is rated 7.6, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Test Management writes "Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team". 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". IBM Engineering Test Management is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our IBM Engineering Test Management 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.
