We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and Zephyr Enterprise 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 allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"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."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"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."
"We use the solution for test case management."
"If anyone is looking for a good, lightweight, flexible and agile test management product, I think they would do very well with Zephyr Enterprise."
"The solution does its job well."
"Zephyr Enterprise is a stable solution."
"It has 90% of the basic features you need without having to pay a lot of extra money."
"It has many features, but the main things that we need are the test cycles and integration with automation because we have automation for the web and mobile applications. We use it for test case management to run the test cases and get the results. At this moment, it is fulfilling our requirements. We are able to get the test execution report and the test pass and fail report. This summary is delivered to our management."
"It has integration with test automation tools."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"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 solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"We would like support for the agile and behavior-driven development (BDD) approaches."
"Creating better default varieties of reporting would make the product much better and more popular."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"The reporting, and the ability to reorganize the test repository, which are a little stifling. There is definitely room for improvement there."
"We faced some errors while uploading the test cases."
"Security needs improvement to protect customer information better."
"We have a lot of automation for our products, and we require a utility for its integration with automation. Currently, we have to write this utility ourselves. It would be great if they can provide such a utility."
"Zephyr Enterprise needs to redesign the reporting."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 72 reviews while Zephyr Enterprise is ranked 4th in Test Management Tools with 8 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while Zephyr Enterprise is rated 7.8. 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 Zephyr Enterprise writes "Highly stable solution and meets users' needs". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish, whereas Zephyr Enterprise is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Zephyr Enterprise report.
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.
