We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."
"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."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The product has many features."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"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."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 71 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". 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". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Sauce Labs, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
