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

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

OpenText Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
37th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.7%, 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 TestComplete4.7%
OpenText Business Processing Testing0.9%
Other94.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RR
Consultant at Infrasoft Technologies
Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases
There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.
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 BPT framework is very modular."
"We can now take test automation through the entire business process -- testing web service availability before automated test packs start, sending and retrieving data via web-services and control of all web service testing in a single tool, along with the GUI testing of business processes across a multitude of platforms from java web through to AS400 green screen terminal apps."
"ROI is pretty good as the approach of framework allows virtually everyone to take part in designing test cases."
"The big difference with BPT over conventional frameworks with which I have worked is that BPT allows me to separate test development from automation development."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that even a nontechnical tester, like a functional tester or a business analyst, can use it once the components are ready."
"Because everyone can create test cases, not only the quantity but also the quality is improved, which results in less defects in production."
"This solution is very helpful to me, and I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"For us, the automated test farm of 20 virtual machines for execution, 20 TestComplete licenses and 20 automated testers are doing the job of 100 manual testers."
"TestComplete replaced QTP as the preferred choice of tool for the organization; it is much faster, works better across technologies (especially Flex-based UI), and is better compatible with newer technologies directly out of the box."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"Even with my limited programming knowledge, I was able to create automation tests using the Keyword Test feature."
"With TestComplete, I can discover bugs faster and easier than testing manually."
"TestComplete is much more flexible, light, and easy to use."
"After TestComplete, we have been able to reduce that time to less than one week."
 

Cons

"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"Technical support lacks efficiency and all they do is to move in circles by opening new tickets and all the related stuffs without any intention of solving the real problem."
"To be honest, technical support is not that great."
"Test execution speed has been my biggest concern."
"Initial releases we used of the product (v12) were a little unstable, but with the release of v12.01, we had no further issues."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool."
"The only one I can really think of is speed to test execution."
"TestComplete had problems during long hours runs. In some cases it could crash without leaving any logs."
"I pay for support and maintenance; having used the “support” functions through online forums, I can say there is room for improvement."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"I can sense there's still a little bit more room for improvement in terms of making the whole testing process easier."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"Memory consumption Speed of interaction with controls Sets of prepared libraries like asserts Templates of tests from scratch"
"I would like to see improved language support, with Python being my first choice."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"It is approximately $6,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Construction Company
18%
Educational Organization
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
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

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Migros Bank AG
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.