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

SmartBear TestComplete vs TestingWhiz 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
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)
TestingWhiz
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
23rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
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 TestingWhiz is 0.6%, up from 0.2% 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%
TestingWhiz0.6%
Other94.3%
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.
VS
Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies
Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"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."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"SmartBear TestComplete performs some self-healing and has a feature called OCR (optical character recognition)."
"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."
 

Cons

"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"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."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"The integration tools could be better."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"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."
"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 solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
Information not available
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?
It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.
What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?
Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...
What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost
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.