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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

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
11th
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
8th
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 June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete4.9%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Other93.5%
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

"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"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."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"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."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"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."
"In all projects where I participated it helped significantly improve and speed up regression testing, which is usually bottleneck before release."
"Customer Service: It's good. Technical Support: It's good."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"The automation has improved over time, allowing it to integrate with other external tools for defect tracking."
 

Cons

"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"With version 8.5 we faced workspace crash issues frequently."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"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."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"The solution doesn't have a very flexible pricing model."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"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."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"The test object repository needs to be improved."
"From my understanding, the product has changed significantly since v5 was released. I don’t know that it has necessarily improved, for my needs."
"We did not maximize our ROI until we put somebody full-time on our TestComplete endeavours. The tool does have a learning curve, and it wasn't until we had an in-house expert on it that we began to see the benefits of automated testing over traditional QA roles."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
 

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."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.