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

Functionize vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Functionize
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
15th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Functionize is 1.4%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 6.0%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete6.0%
Functionize1.4%
Other92.6%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2541093 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Provides efficient test automation for web applications and has good technical support services
The platform's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process. Vision AI enhances image recognition capabilities, improving the accuracy and efficiency of visual testing. The audit trail feature helps track changes and maintain compliance, which is particularly important in regulated industries. Smart fix automatically resolves issues, reducing manual intervention, while the self-healing feature ensures that test cases remain accurate and functional, even when system changes occur.
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's most valuable features include its recorder, which allows users to create test cases with minimal effort, significantly simplifying the process."
"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."
"I changed because I did not have any solutions as close to the real thing as this."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"Regressions and Smoke was done manually in the past, which has been replaced by Automated Testing."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"Good test coverage through automation and provides unique solutions to most of the automation challenges (e.g. comparison of images)."
"Object spy and object recognition are working very well, giving us a lot of possibilities."
"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."
 

Cons

"The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility."
"Often crashes with large projects. File check-in takes too much time in TFS."
"I would like to see improved language support, with Python being my first choice."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"Right now, in terms of recording and scripting the solution is not user-friendly."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"Increased performance with less memory and cpu usage."
"There is a problem with usability because the speed decreases, which could be an issue with scalability because of too many hits on the site."
"The initial deployment of TestComplete was difficult, but with the assistance of SmartBear technical support, I was able to get it up and running."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
 

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Functionize?
The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles.
What needs improvement with Functionize?
The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility.
What is your primary use case for Functionize?
We use the product to transition customers from manual to automated testing, particularly for web applications. It involves reducing team sizes, accelerating testing strategies, and providing speci...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salesforce, Mastercard, Google, HP Enterprise, Cisco, Farmers Insurance, The General
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: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.