We performed a comparison between SmartBear TestComplete and TFS 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."I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."
"The interface is good with TFS."
"I have found almost all of the features valuable because it integrates well with your Microsoft products. If a client is using the entire Microsoft platform, then TFS would be definitely preferable. It integrates with the digital studio development environment as well."
"TFS is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the backlog."
"Since it is a robust solution, I face no performance issues. Also, considering how well the implementation process of the solution was carried out, we never faced any issues while using the solution."
"I feel that the test plan and test tools are more manageable in TFS."
"User alerts are very helpful for knowing when work is required."
"Complete integration with VS IDE and Office tools: This give us a possibility of high-level automation, thus minimizing human error."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"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."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"The dashboard needs more enhancements."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"It has been really dated. When you start to work more in an agile environment, it is not really that flexible. They tried to replicate the look and feel of Jira, but it is not quite there. It was nice to use in the past, but it is not as flexible now with the changing development environments and methodologies."
"They have room for improvement in merging the source code changes for multiple developers across files. It is very good at highlighting the changes that the source code automatically does not know how to handle, but it's not very good at reporting the ones that it did automatically. There are times when we have source code that gets merged, and we lose the changes that we expected to happen. It can get a little confusing at times. They can just do a little bit better on the merging of changes for multiple developers."
"I would also like a true command prompt like Git."
"There's not automatic access to test case management and execution."
"The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved."
"Its pricing could be improved."
SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 93 reviews. SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Visual Studio Test Professional and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our SmartBear TestComplete vs. TFS report.
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.