We performed a comparison between LEAPWORK and SmartBear TestComplete 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."The most valuable of this solution is the no code option. It offers drag and drop when it comes to development and removes the need for a developer."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"It provides automated testing. Instead of us doing manual testing, we can utilize Leapwork, and it tests most of our critical processes. In the next phase, we also plan to do some process work with it, such as using Leapwork to create reports or provide certain extracts of data."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression 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."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The initial setup is difficult."
"It is a very comprehensive tool, and there is a significant learning curve to being able to adopt the tool. Because it does so much, there is only so much that you can learn. You can, however, do some simpler things right away. They do have a kind of boot camp where some of their experts engage with you, and during that time, you can work on the top initiatives that you want to do, and that's a good process. After you start using the tool, there is a lot more that you would want to do."
"The only thing that I don't like about the product is the need to deploy agents on the laptops of people doing the testing. So, you have an agent on a server, then you have an agent on the laptop of the person who is doing the testing, and that seems like a lot of stuff and a kind of anti-cloud. Why do I have to deploy agents on people's machines in order to do something in the cloud? I'm sure they're doing that so they can monitor their licensing and all that stuff, but it is not necessarily a friendly process."
"This solution could be improved by offering better reporting related to the integration into Azure DevOps."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"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."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
LEAPWORK is ranked 17th in Test Automation Tools with 3 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 72 reviews. LEAPWORK is rated 7.6, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of LEAPWORK writes "The product has a user-friendly UI, and it provides good support, but it is expensive and difficult to setup". 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". LEAPWORK is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Katalon Studio and Avo Assure, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestLeft. See our LEAPWORK vs. SmartBear TestComplete 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.