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

SmartBear TestComplete vs SmartBear TestLeft 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

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)
SmartBear TestLeft
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
39th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.1%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestLeft is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.1%
SmartBear TestLeft0.4%
Other94.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
reviewer1378161 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Consultant at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Simple to set up and the test execute feature is helpful, but the cost could be reduced
Our primary use case is Point of Sale (POS) testing The most valuable features are test executor and development. TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved. We have been using SmartBear TestLeft for the past month. Stability-wise, TestLeft is…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The integration with various tools is important."
"Selenium integration."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The most valuable features are test executor and development."
 

Cons

"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"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 pricing is the constraint."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 product is becoming more and more expensive."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The cost should be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise32
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
American Red Cross, CISCO, HONDA, ADIDAS, TBC bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, BrowserStack, Worksoft and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.