TrustRadius

TestComplete

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
TestComplete
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
TestComplete is a GUI test automation tool that enables users of all skill levels to test the UI of every desktop, web, and mobile application. TestComplete is best suited for testers, automation engineers, and QA teams in any industry.
$2,256
per license
Pricing
TestComplete
Editions & Modules
Node-Locked Base
2,256
per license
Node-Locked Pro
3,950
per license
Float - Base
5,077
per license
Float - Pro
7,901
per license
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
TestComplete
Free Trial
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsPay for only the modules needed. TestComplete Pro includes all three modules: desktop, web, and mobile, at a bundled price point, as well as access to the parallel testing engine, TestExecute. TestComplete has additional add-ons, including TestExecute and the Intelligent Quality Add-On.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
TestComplete
Ask people about this product

See helpful people who have experience with this product

Considered Both Products
TestComplete
Verified User
Employee
Chose TestComplete
We still use both products in our company, since Postman is mainly used for backend automation and TestComplete for frontend automation. The difference is that via Postman you can easily write tests that send different requests to your server, get the response, and compare them …
JK
Jinuraj Kottackel
Senior Test Enginner
Chose TestComplete
I have evaluated Tricentis Tosca and another product along with TestComplete. TestComplete is much better [and more] user friendly.
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose TestComplete
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases …
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose TestComplete
For their special field (API & web testing) I choose those products over TestComplete
AP
Atul Patil
Senior Test Engineer
Chose TestComplete
Below are the points why we selected TestComplete 1. Better UI. 2. Plenty of validation cases supports i.e. checkpoints. 3. Multiple scripting languages. 4. Better accuracy and robustness. 5. Good documentation and Video tutorials. 6. Great support team.
Verified User
Analyst
Chose TestComplete
Based on my evaluation regards to the product cost, useability, the TestComplete came first on my selections.
Michal Ignaczak | TrustRadius Reviewer
Michal Ignaczak
Senior Test Software Engineer
Chose TestComplete
TestStand is a much more complex tool than TestComplete and it's for a little bit different solutions I think. For desktop apps I would use the TestComplete, For Mobile / Web -> Python + Behave + Pytest selenium - TestComplete is much overcomplicated and slow! For …
MM
Mohammed Mitha
CTO (Chief Technical Officer)
Chose TestComplete
The major advantage over other tools is the ease of use. A chimp will be able to figure out TestComplete whereas the others require extensive coding knowledge
Verified User
Engineer
Chose TestComplete
We are using Katalon for web-based applications, mainly because our QA engineers have a strong experience with it. But it does not allow precise item identification in Delphi-based applications and that was a show stopper for us. Having received recommendations for …
Verified User
Engineer
Chose TestComplete
We used before the Coded UI Tests which are in Visual Studio / Azure DevOps, and the tests were impossible to maintain and very very flaky. Then in 2015, we selected TestComplete, as it was clearly the tool with the most feature for desktop UI testing. Selenium was …
Chose TestComplete
I know from using other tools in the past years that TestComplete could be more cost-effective, yet still get the job done.
AM
Axel Madode
QA Senior Analyst
Chose TestComplete
TestComplete is more complete than Cypress.io because Cypress.io is only used to complete end-to-end testing for web apps. These two tools are user friendly and easy to use. For the needs of our company, we have chosen TestComplete for the variety of testing applications.
Verified User
Manager
Chose TestComplete
TestComplete is a robust test automation tool and not for someone who expects to just record and playback. This can be done with [TestComplete], but the strength of the tool is the ability to code complex actions and capturing of objects. The reporting of results is also …
DG
Dale Ganus
Associate Managing Director
Chose TestComplete
It has been almost 5 years since we researched products, but TestComplete gave us the best overall advantage to achieve our goals. So, that is why we chose it.
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose TestComplete
It's been a long time so it may not be a fair assessment, but I don't recall IBM's product being as easy to use or have as many features.
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose TestComplete
Selenium gets a lot of mileage for being opensource and free, but in terms of features, ease of use, and the added support and development structure of an enterprise product, TestComplete is the clean cut winner.
Verified User
Manager
Chose TestComplete
TestComplete was selected after trying multiple product offerings. Initially these product offerings were installed with trail keys, and various factors were weighted and sized based on complexity to install, and ease of use. TestComplete scored higher than any other product …
Verified User
Professional
Chose TestComplete
We haven't used any other products to any extent. Once we started using TestComplete, we didn't go anywhere else.
Verified User
Engineer
Chose TestComplete
I have used UFT, Katalon Studio.
UFT has robust object recognition engine than TestComplete.
For example, Katalon Studio supports Groovy and Java so it is easier for programmers/testers to automate apps in java as it is a popular language, but TC doesn't support it.
Verified User
Employee
Chose TestComplete
TestComplete gives the best option of record and playback. Also, it does not have any problem with object recognition just like Selenium.

Selenium needs more manual efforts in selecting the object properties and utilizing them. Also, Selenium needs a good command of one coding …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
TestComplete
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 7.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
TestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
6.3
(88 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.1
(6 ratings)
Usability
7.8
(7 ratings)
Support Rating
6.6
(7 ratings)
Implementation Rating
6.7
(4 ratings)
User Testimonials
TestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
SmartBear
Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Pros
SmartBear
  • Identifying UI objects and application structure
  • Expandability of tests through scripts and script extensions/plugins
  • low barrier of entry (you can get started quickly, and other's don't need much explanation to contribute on a basic level)
  • Possibility of Jira integration for reporting
  • Relatively few (and usually easy to solve) git conflicts when working simultaneously
  • easy handling of test data, also for iterative tests
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Cons
SmartBear
  • TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
  • TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.
Ben Fishel-Brown | TrustRadius Reviewer
Ben Fishel-Brown
Test Automation & Security Team Lead
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
SmartBear
We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Usability
SmartBear
It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Support Rating
SmartBear
Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Implementation Rating
SmartBear
If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers
Yury Vakhatov | TrustRadius Reviewer
Yury Vakhatov
Test Automation Engineer
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
SmartBear
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
Return on Investment
SmartBear
  • Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
  • With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs
Verified User
Anonymous
Read full review
ScreenShots