Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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
13th
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 (8th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Functionize is 1.8%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 6.0%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete6.0%
Functionize1.8%
Other92.2%
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 integration with various tools is important."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
 

Cons

"The solution currently does not support mobile applications. It would significantly improve its versatility."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"The integration tools could be better."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"Occasionally, image comparison results in failures, possibly due to issues with resolution or font size on the server side, which can be challenging to identify."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product helps reduce overall costs by decreasing reliance on manual testers and speeding up testing cycles."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
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, UiPath and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.