Top 40 Commercial Alternatives to TestComplete

Introduction

TestComplete, a flagship product from SmartBear, emerged as a popular codeless/scripted end-to-end (E2E) test automation tool for desktop, web, and mobile applications. It combines record-and-playback workflows with scripting support (JavaScript, Python, VBScript, and DelphiScript), integrates with CI/CD, and provides a broad object recognition layer to help teams build durable UI tests. Over the years, TestComplete became a mainstay in QA teams because it balances accessibility for less technical testers with the power developers expect in a full-stack automation framework.

Its strengths include wide platform coverage, a mature ecosystem, and compatibility with modern pipelines. However, like any comprehensive UI automation tool, it can require careful setup, structured test design to reduce flakiness, and ongoing maintenance as applications evolve. As testing needs diversify—think visual validation, device clouds, AI-assisted authoring, continuous monitoring, or performance and security testing—many teams evaluate commercial alternatives that specialize in these areas or provide different trade-offs in cost, scalability, and workflow.

This article highlights 40 commercial alternatives that teams consider alongside or instead of TestComplete. Some are direct functional testing competitors; others are complementary tools in visual, performance, synthetics, security, RPA, and device cloud categories.

Overview: The Top 40 Alternatives We’ll Cover

Here are the top 40 commercial alternatives to TestComplete:

• Applitools Eyes

• Applitools for Mobile

• Automation Anywhere

• BitBar

• BlazeMeter

• Blue Prism

• BrowserStack Automate

• Burp Suite (Enterprise)

• Checkly

• Cypress Cloud

• Datadog Synthetic Tests

• Eggplant Test

• Functionize

• Happo

• IBM Rational Functional Tester

• Kobiton

• LambdaTest

• LoadRunner

• Mabl

• Micro Focus Silk Test

• Microsoft Playwright Testing

• NeoLoad

• New Relic Synthetics

• Percy

• Perfecto

• Pingdom

• RPA Tools (UiPath)

• Ranorex

• ReadyAPI

• Repeato

• Sahi Pro

• Sauce Labs

• Squish

• TestCafe Studio

• Testim

• Tricentis Tosca

• UFT One (formerly QTP)

• Virtuoso

• Waldo

• testRigor

Why Look for TestComplete Alternatives?

• Cost and licensing fit: Budget, license models, and total cost of ownership can drive teams to explore tools that better match their scale, usage patterns, or cloud-first preference.

• Setup and maintenance: Like other UI tools, TestComplete benefits from structured test design. Teams may seek platforms with self-healing locators, AI-assisted maintenance, or fully managed clouds to reduce upkeep.

• Specialized needs: Some teams need visual AI validation, real-device coverage at scale, performance/load testing, DAST, or always-on synthetics—capabilities better served by specialty platforms.

• Cross-platform and developer-first workflows: Organizations standardizing on JavaScript/TypeScript, Playwright, or open-source-driven approaches may prefer tools that align tightly with that stack or provide managed runners.

• Flakiness mitigation and speed: Tools with faster parallelization, cloud grids, or robust resilience features can reduce flake rates, shorten feedback loops, and improve developer experience.

Detailed Breakdown of Alternatives

Applitools Eyes

A visual testing platform for web, mobile, and desktop with AI-powered visual diffs and the Ultrafast Grid. It focuses on catching UI regressions through visual comparisons.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Eyes specializes in visual validation rather than functional E2E authoring. It often complements TestComplete rather than replaces it.

• Best for: Front-end and QA teams validating look-and-feel across versions.

Applitools for Mobile

Mobile-focused visual testing for iOS and Android as part of the Applitools ecosystem.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focuses on visual checks for mobile UIs, complementing functional tests you author elsewhere.

• Best for: Teams prioritizing mobile UI consistency.

Automation Anywhere

An RPA and desktop UI automation platform for Windows that overlaps with test automation use cases.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: More RPA-centric; useful when automating end-to-end business workflows across desktop apps.

• Best for: Teams automating complex UI-driven business processes.

BitBar

A mobile and web cloud testing grid from SmartBear with real devices and browsers.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: BitBar is an execution cloud. You author tests in your chosen framework and run them on BitBar’s infrastructure.

• Best for: Teams needing reliable device/browser scaling.

BlazeMeter

A SaaS performance and load testing platform for web, API, and protocol-level testing with popular open-source compatibility.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focuses on performance, not UI functional automation. Often complements UI testing.

• Best for: Performance engineers and DevOps teams.

Blue Prism

An RPA platform for Windows that can be used for repeatable UI workflows in enterprise environments.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: More suited to RPA and business process automation than classical test authoring.

• Best for: Organizations automating complex desktop workflows.

BrowserStack Automate

A large real-device and browser cloud for web and mobile test execution.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Provides the grid and analytics; you bring your test code. Complements or replaces on-prem execution.

• Best for: Cross-browser/device automation at scale.

Burp Suite (Enterprise)

A DAST scanner for web and API security testing in enterprise environments.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Security-focused; not a functional UI automation tool. Often runs alongside QA automation.

• Best for: Security and DevSecOps teams.

Checkly

Headless checks and E2E testing as code for web and API, built on a modern stack.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first, cloud-native checks; great for developers who want tests as code and production synthetics.

• Best for: Engineering teams standardizing on Playwright.

Cypress Cloud

A SaaS runner and insights layer for Cypress tests with parallelization and flake detection.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Optimizes Cypress-based testing rather than providing codeless authoring.

• Best for: Teams invested in Cypress.

Datadog Synthetic Tests

Browser and API synthetics that integrate with Datadog’s observability platform.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Synthetics-first with strong production monitoring. Less focus on deep, code-heavy UI frameworks.

• Best for: Ops/Dev teams needing end-to-end monitoring.

Eggplant Test

A model-based, AI/computer-vision automation tool for desktop, web, and mobile.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Competes directly on cross-platform UI automation with a strong model-based approach.

• Best for: Teams seeking model-driven, CV-assisted UI testing.

Functionize

An AI-assisted E2E testing platform for web and mobile with ML-powered selectors.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar scope with a stronger emphasis on AI-driven maintenance and low-code.

• Best for: Teams prioritizing reduced flakiness and maintenance.

Happo

A visual regression testing tool for web components in CI.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focuses on visual component diffs rather than end-to-end flows.

• Best for: Front-end teams guarding component UI stability.

IBM Rational Functional Tester

A long-standing enterprise UI automation solution for desktop and web.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar class of enterprise UI tool with deep legacy app support.

• Best for: Enterprises with legacy stacks and IBM ecosystems.

Kobiton

A mobile device cloud for testing and automation.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focused on device cloud execution; use your Appium or other mobile tests.

• Best for: Mobile-first teams scaling device coverage.

LambdaTest

A cross-browser testing platform for web and mobile.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: A cloud grid/service rather than a codeless authoring IDE.

• Best for: Teams standardizing on open-source frameworks.

LoadRunner

An enterprise performance/load testing tool for web, API, and protocols.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Performance-focused, not a functional UI test IDE. A complementary capability.

• Best for: Performance engineering at enterprise scale.

Mabl

A low-code/AI E2E testing platform for web and API with a SaaS-first model.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar goals with strong SaaS orientation and auto-healing features.

• Best for: Teams seeking low-code E2E with minimal infrastructure.

Micro Focus Silk Test

An enterprise functional UI testing tool for desktop and web.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Comparable enterprise UI coverage with a long history in desktop/web testing.

• Best for: Enterprises with deep desktop automation needs.

Microsoft Playwright Testing

A managed cloud service for running Playwright tests at scale.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: A runner for Playwright rather than a codeless tool; ideal for code-centric teams.

• Best for: Teams standardizing on Playwright.

NeoLoad

Enterprise load and performance testing for web, API, and protocols.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Dedicated to performance testing; complements functional UI automation.

• Best for: DevOps and performance engineering teams.

New Relic Synthetics

Scripted browser and API checks within New Relic’s observability platform.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Monitoring-focused and code-first, not a codeless functional IDE.

• Best for: Teams extending observability into user journeys.

Percy

Visual testing for the web with snapshot-based comparisons in CI.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Visual coverage rather than full functional automation; often used alongside E2E tools.

• Best for: Front-end teams maintaining UI consistency.

Perfecto

An enterprise device cloud for mobile and web with analytics.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution grid and analytics for your existing test frameworks.

• Best for: Large organizations scaling mobile/web testing.

Pingdom

A synthetics and uptime monitoring tool with transactional checks.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Production monitoring and uptime focus, not deep functional testing.

• Best for: Ops and DevOps teams monitoring live systems.

RPA Tools (UiPath)

An RPA platform for Windows and macOS that can be used for regression UI automation.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: RPA-first; well-suited for business process automation with overlapping UI automation capabilities.

• Best for: Teams automating cross-application business flows.

Ranorex

A codeless/scripted E2E tool for desktop, web, and mobile with a robust recorder and object repository.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Very similar scope; choice often hinges on language preference and ecosystem fit.

• Best for: Teams seeking a strong desktop/web/mobile automation IDE.

ReadyAPI

An API testing suite for SOAP, REST, and GraphQL with advanced features.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Backend/API-focused; complements, rather than replaces, UI automation.

• Best for: Backend developers and QA validating APIs.

Repeato

A codeless, computer-vision-based mobile UI testing tool for iOS and Android.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Mobile-first with CV emphasis; a lightweight path to robust mobile UI coverage.

• Best for: Mobile teams needing resilient, low-code testing.

Sahi Pro

A web/desktop E2E UI testing solution tailored to enterprise apps.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar enterprise focus; appreciated for handling tricky web apps.

• Best for: Teams tackling large, dynamic enterprise UIs.

Sauce Labs

A cloud device and browser grid for web and mobile with advanced analytics.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution infrastructure and analytics; you author tests in frameworks of choice.

• Best for: Organizations scaling cross-platform automation.

Squish

A GUI E2E tool for Qt, QML, web, desktop, and embedded systems.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Stands out for Qt and embedded UI automation.

• Best for: Teams building Qt/QML and embedded UIs.

TestCafe Studio

A commercial, codeless IDE variant of TestCafe for web automation.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Web-only focus with a simpler, codeless IDE approach.

• Best for: Web teams wanting a low-code path.

Testim

An AI-assisted web E2E testing platform with self-healing locators.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar scope, with stronger emphasis on AI-based maintenance.

• Best for: Teams seeking AI-assisted web test authoring.

Tricentis Tosca

A model-based E2E testing platform covering web, mobile, desktop, and SAP.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Competes head-to-head, especially for SAP and large enterprise programs.

• Best for: Enterprises standardizing on MBTA.

UFT One (formerly QTP)

An enterprise functional UI testing suite for desktop and web.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar heritage and capabilities; choice often depends on existing tooling and skill sets.

• Best for: Enterprises with established functional test ecosystems.

Virtuoso

An AI-assisted E2E testing platform for web and mobile with vision and NLP-driven authoring.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Emphasizes AI/NLP-based authoring to reduce maintenance.

• Best for: Teams seeking faster authoring with minimal scripting.

Waldo

A codeless mobile UI testing platform for iOS and Android with a cloud runner.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Mobile-focused, codeless, and fully hosted.

• Best for: Mobile teams wanting rapid authoring without code.

testRigor

A natural-language E2E testing platform for web and mobile.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Prioritizes natural language authoring over traditional scripting.

• Best for: Teams enabling non-developers to author maintainable tests.

Things to Consider Before Choosing a TestComplete Alternative

• Project scope and platforms: Do you need desktop, web, and mobile in one tool, or specialized tools per layer (visual, performance, synthetics, security)?

• Language and skills: What languages and frameworks does your team prefer (JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, .NET)? Will a low-code/no-code approach accelerate adoption?

• Ease of setup and maintenance: How quickly can you onboard, stabilize locators, and keep tests maintainable as the UI evolves?

• Execution speed and scalability: Do you need high-concurrency execution, global device/browser coverage, or managed cloud runners?

• CI/CD integration: Does the tool integrate cleanly with your pipelines, containers, and artifact management?

• Debugging and insights: How strong are logs, videos, screenshots, trace data, and root-cause analysis?

• Ecosystem and support: Consider vendor support, documentation, training, and community reach.

• Cost and licensing: Evaluate total cost of ownership (licenses, infrastructure, maintenance) and pricing models that match your usage.

• Security and compliance: Ensure the platform meets your data, privacy, and compliance requirements.

• Future fit: Look for features like self-healing, AI/ML assistance, component-level testing, or observability tie-ins that align with your roadmap.

Conclusion

TestComplete remains a powerful, widely adopted solution for cross-platform UI automation, combining codeless workflows with scripting flexibility and CI/CD integration. Still, today’s testing landscape is broader and more specialized. Depending on your needs, you might prefer:

• AI-assisted authoring and self-healing (e.g., Functionize, Mabl, Testim, Virtuoso, testRigor)

• Visual validation at component or page level (e.g., Applitools Eyes, Percy, Happo)

• Cloud device and browser scaling (e.g., BrowserStack Automate, Sauce Labs, LambdaTest, Perfecto, BitBar, Kobiton)

• Synthetics for production monitoring (e.g., Checkly, Datadog Synthetic Tests, New Relic Synthetics, Pingdom)

• Enterprise performance testing (e.g., LoadRunner, NeoLoad, BlazeMeter)

• Desktop-heavy or model-based enterprise stacks (e.g., UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, Eggplant Test, Micro Focus Silk Test, IBM RFT, Squish)

• RPA-driven UI workflows (e.g., Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, UiPath)

In practice, many teams blend tools: a primary E2E framework, a device/browser cloud, visual regression checks, and performance or security testing as needed. Start with your requirements, team skills, and delivery timelines, then pick the mix that reduces maintenance, scales well, and provides fast, reliable feedback. Done right, the right alternative—or combination—can streamline your pipeline, improve coverage, and keep your releases moving confidently.