We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare SmartBear TestComplete vs. TFS

You must select at least 2 products to compare!
SmartBear TestComplete Logo
14,640 views|10,378 comparisons
TFS Logo
Read 16 TFS reviews.
18,018 views|15,201 comparisons
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. TFS and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools.""The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers.""The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing.""Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well.""The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup.""The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules.""TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool.""The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."

More SmartBear TestComplete Pros »

"This solution enables us to link all items usefully, in the way we use Agile.""The most valuable features are the dashboard and task-selection capability.""The interface is easy to navigate.""The most valuable feature is the backlog.""Good branching and labelling features.""The most valuable feature is simplicity.""The initial setup is fairly easy.""The most valuable features are test case writing and bug tracking."

More TFS Pros »

"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved.""The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS.""The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation.""The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS.""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.""The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced.""Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work.""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."

More SmartBear TestComplete Cons »

"The test management interface is not very handy.""The interface can be improved and made more user-friendly.""I would like to see the reporting features expanded so that I can see details on the users connected to all of the projects.""The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved.""Integration from Visual Studio could be improved.""They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA.""There should be management of the project built-in.""The reporting functionality is something that they should work on."

More TFS Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team.""The option we chose was around $2,000 USD.""The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000.""The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive.""Our ROI is about $10,000 a year.""The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower.""It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."

More SmartBear TestComplete Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The pricing is reasonable at this time.""TFS is more competitively priced than some other solutions.""We pay subscription fees on a yearly basis and the price is reasonable.""I wouldn't say that this tool is cheap or expensive but in the middle.""We are using the open-source version.""The price of the solution is cheaper than other competitors and it is a per-user license.""We pay for the license yearly."

More TFS Pricing and Cost Advice »

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy.
Top Answer: The price is moderate. It's not the cheapest or the most expensive if you compare it with other competitors. It's okay.
Top Answer: We have something called Name Mapping in TestComplete it is the only Name Mapping that is available for TestComplete. If they allowed two Name Mappings, or run Name Mapping in run time, that would be… more »
Top Answer: I feel that the test plan and test tools are more manageable in TFS.
Top Answer: In the TFS tool, we, essentially, made the test cases and test tools. The execution of test cases could stand improvement. They have provided many ways to manage the execution, but they can streamline… more »
Average Words per Review
Average Words per Review
Also Known As
Team Foundation Server
Learn More

TestComplete is a powerful and robust automated testing tool for mobileweb and desktop  applications. Quickly and easily create accurate and repeatable tests across multiple devices, platforms and environments – regardless of experience level. It supports multiple languages, modern control sets and integrates with open source frameworks and tools like Selenium, SoapUI and Jenkins.

Visual Studio Team Foundation Server (TFS) is the collaboration platform at the core of Microsoft's application lifecycle management (ALM) solution. TFS supports agile development practices, multiple IDEs and platforms locally or in the cloud and gives you the tools you need to effectively manage software development projects throughout the IT lifecycle.
Learn more about SmartBear TestComplete
Learn more about TFS
Sample Customers
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Vendex KBB IT Services, Info Support, Fujitsu Consulting, TCSC, Airways New Zealand, HP
Top Industries
Computer Software Company32%
Manufacturing Company9%
Construction Company9%
Financial Services Firm9%
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company7%
Financial Services Firm36%
Computer Software Company17%
Manufacturing Company14%
Insurance Company6%
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider17%
Manufacturing Company7%
Company Size
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise33%
Large Enterprise44%
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise63%
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. TFS and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.

SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 3rd in Test Automation Tools with 14 reviews while TFS is ranked 2nd in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 8.2, while TFS is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "Good project management features improve discipline and productivity in our application development lifecycle". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Micro Focus UFT One, Ranorex Studio and Appium, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software and Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. TFS 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.