No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ACCELQ vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 22, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

ACCELQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
37th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
22nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (18th), API Testing Tools (15th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (7th), AI Quality Assurance (9th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of ACCELQ is 1.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.8%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.8%
ACCELQ Automate1.4%
Other92.8%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at Ascendion
Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature
We evaluated data testing for millions of records. As per architecture, it can efficiently run a few thousands of records. However, we couldn't implement it for millions of records. Thus, it works well for a small amount of data. We have 30 users for it in our organization and use it daily. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Lead at Emerson
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."
"After NPAPI was unsupported by Chrome, our test runs were halted on Chrome for a previous version of TestComplete, and they started running again with version 11.11."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"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 database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Valuable for us is the ability to identify objects by using Find methods."
"The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality; it quickly detects any changes in the UI."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
 

Cons

"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"LoadComplete could be a little more user-friendly, but is still better than LoginVSI."
"When it comes to customization controls the scalability of SmartBear TestComplete is limited."
"It is very difficult to have multiple developers when using Name Mapping. You can’t merge all the files and this creates conflicts."
"The test object repository needs to be improved."
"There often are issues with web test execution."
"The initial deployment of TestComplete was difficult, but with the assistance of SmartBear technical support, I was able to get it up and running."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete?
We are using SmartBear TestComplete ( /products/smartbear-testcomplete-reviews ) for automation over applications.
 

Also Known As

ACCELQ Unified
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

FISCHER, optanix, ERICSSON, BenifitMall, QuickPivot, DIGITALFUEL, westcreek
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.