Compare SmartBear TestComplete vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
Sponsored
 | Anonymous User SAP QA Manager at a manufacturing company |
| Marc Medina Test Automation Architect at Watronix Information Technology Ltd |
| RameshVelusamy Programmer at a tech services company |
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
511,307 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:
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications."
"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"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."
"We are satisfied with technical support. Communicating with them is very simple. We also have a lot of online resources to check and to study and to train our team with. The documentation is very clear and readily available."
"Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software."
"The setup is easy and straightforward."
"The solution is very stable; there's nothing in relation to stability to complain about."
"The most valuable features are the SSIS reports, the deployment models, and the ability to interact with other Microsoft tools."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"Performance-wise, it is a great tool."
"The most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper."
Cons
"It would be great if our business testers could develop their own automated test cases. With every release you do, you have to go back and touch your old test cases and bring them up to speed, or develop new test cases. In the beginning, that is a challenge because you have to have someone who is certified in the tool to help you develop these test cases."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."
"Better automation capability would be helpful."
"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"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."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The data flow can be improved."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
"We would like to be able to easily integrate this solution with our continuous integration tools, such as Jenkins."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
"The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable."
"There is a cost involved to doing it, but once you get over the initial cost, then you'll start reaping the benefits and seeing that testing is getting done more quickly and efficiently. We are still early on with it, but the expectation and what we're seeing is that we will start seeing some savings coming out on the back-end once we have this done."
"The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP."
"The initial investment is probably a little high. It was a little hard for me to sell, but it was a one-shot deal and that's why it's so high. All we are doing now is paying annual maintenance, which we don't have to do if we don't want upgrades, but we do."
"Purchasing and licensing are okay. Go for the perpetual licenses. In that way, you own a license, then you can purchase maintenance and support on top of that, so you don't have to pay every year for it. Even if you don't want it a contract with Worksoft Certify in the future, you will have your own license of it. Then, if your usage is not that much, you can have one or two perpetual licenses. However, if you want to run your processes, you will need more licenses, e.g., using the run-only licenses. They are really cheap compared to the full licensing."
"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."
"For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person."
"I think that the pricing is quite good."
"The pricing is expensive."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice »
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
511,307 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the ability to automate quickly and to maintain and update scripts.
Top Answer: I haven't a bad opinion about the prices, however, when you pay a license is for a month or a year but in my experience… more »
Top Answer: We would like this to be able to be used outside of SAP applications, as it would be good for other types of products.
Top Answer: In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate… more »
Top Answer: The solution doesn't have a very flexible pricing model.
Top Answer: I was going to say load and performance but I really didn't get a chance to get into the load and performance part of… more »
Top Answer: The stability has always been very good.
Top Answer: We aren't bothered by the pricing of the solution at all due to the fact that it provides us with a lot of great tools… more »
Top Answer: In Visual Studio we still don't have anything which can pinpoint memory leaks on a certain code line. It gives me memory… more »
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.
TestComplete is a powerful and robust automated testing tool for mobile, web 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 Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
Learn more about SmartBear TestComplete
Learn more about Visual Studio Test Professional
Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Manufacturing Company28%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
Consumer Goods Company13%
Logistics Company8%
Computer Software Company31%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm9%
Manufacturing Company7%
Computer Software Company29%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider10%
Financial Services Firm10%
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company7%
Government7%
Computer Software Company40%
Manufacturing Company20%
Healthcare Company10%
Transportation Company10%
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider24%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government5%
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise85%
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise70%
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise35%
Large Enterprise44%
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise75%
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear TestComplete vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
511,307 professionals have used our research since 2012.
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 3rd in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 8.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.4. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Good integration between the management data and the test cases". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, Micro Focus UFT One and Appium, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, HCL AppScan and Tricentis Tosca. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing 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.