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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.6%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.6%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.7%
Other93.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
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

"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"It is 100% compatible with all sorts of database integrations and is compatible with all types of open source TFT-based applications, which makes it a great product to have."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"By automating regression test suites using this product, we were able to show time savings of more than 1200 hours in less than ONE year."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"It's very helpful that, when you have a recording in one application, in one navigator, you can replay every step in different applications."
"To me, the Object Browser has proven to be the most valuable feature of this product."
"Using TestComplete I was able to immediately (after installation) begin coding regression tests for available functionality."
"Selenium integration."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"In all projects where I participated it helped significantly improve and speed up regression testing, which is usually bottleneck before release."
"Price-wise, feature-wise, its ability to integrate with other products, and of course, scalability-wise, it's great."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
 

Cons

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"I have used it for Web Application automation and sometimes find difficulties while recognizing dynamically-generated runtime object."
"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 Mac OS support."
"Some of the objects/parent objects are dynamically created in the web page. During the test, TestComplete will have problem to identify these kind of objects."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"It comes with a high cost."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."
"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 solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
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

IBM Rational Functional Tester
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.