We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite 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."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."
"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."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"We can generate our own workflow. In our case, it is a report on the PDF file. In the reporting category, we generally verify a couple of things and generate a lot of reports at the end of the day. It provides some useful details about the data captured from the PDF that we can put into an Excel file."
"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"The detailed logging is invaluable."
"Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days."
"It is a very scalable product."
"The document understanding is good."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"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 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."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."
"UiPath needs to improve its Test Manager feature. Defect management and reporting also need improvement."
"Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work."
"The product releases sometimes have issues."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
"UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while UiPath Test Suite 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 UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Appium, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, froglogic Squish and Opkey. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. UiPath Test Suite 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.
