We performed a comparison between Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Design Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage."
"The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases."
"Integration with TDM, test data management tool, provides the ability to generate data or use identified (preset or parametrized) test data. It allows significant expansion of test coverage and flexibility, without creating new tests and needing to maintain them."
"Defects can be traced in the solution."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"In terms of meeting business challenges, it helped to shorten the dev/testing cycle by identifying requirements gaps early in the process, by having models shared within the development team. It helped increase test coverage and reduce the number of issues experienced by clients/customers."
"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"Selenium integration."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"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 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."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"The integration tools could be better."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is ranked 1st in Test Design Automation with 20 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer writes "Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support". 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". Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Jira, TFS and Sealights, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
We monitor all Test Design Automation 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.
