We performed a comparison between Adaptavist Test Management for Jira and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The program is very stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"Selenium integration."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"The integration tools could be better."
"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."
More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 13th in Test Management Tools with 4 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.2, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "Integrates with any automation tool, but the granular reporting feature should be more intuitive ". 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". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
We monitor all Test Management 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.