Top 73 Alternatives to TestComplete for Desktop, Mobile, Web Testing

Introduction: What is TestComplete and why did it become popular?

TestComplete, from SmartBear, is a codeless/scripted end-to-end (E2E) test automation tool for desktop, web, and mobile applications. It rose to prominence by bridging low-code authoring (record/playback, keyword tests) with full scripting power (JavaScript, Python, VBScript, DelphiScript). Teams adopted it to accelerate UI test creation, centralize object repositories, and integrate with CI/CD pipelines and modern development workflows.

Key strengths include broad platform coverage, powerful object recognition, and a familiar IDE-style experience. It fits enterprises that need a commercial suite with support and governance, while still offering flexibility for complex workflows. However, as teams expand testing scope (visual, performance, API, accessibility, security, synthetics), and shift toward cloud-first and code-first practices, many look for complementary or alternative tools that fit specific needs, cost profiles, or engineering stacks.

Below are the top alternatives and complements to TestComplete—spanning E2E automation, component tests, device clouds, visual regression, performance/load, accessibility, security, and synthetics—so you can choose the right fit for your team.

Overview: Top 73 Alternatives to TestComplete

Here are the top 73 alternatives for TestComplete:

• Appium

• Applitools Eyes

• Artillery

• BackstopJS

• BitBar

• BlazeMeter

• BrowserStack Automate

• Burp Suite (Enterprise)

• Capybara

• Checkly

• Cucumber

• Cypress

• Cypress Cloud

• Cypress Component Testing

• Datadog Synthetic Tests

• Eggplant Test

• FitNesse

• Functionize

• Gatling

• Gauge

• Geb

• Happo

• IBM Rational Functional Tester

• JMeter

• Jest

• Karate

• Katalon Platform (Studio)

• Kobiton

• LambdaTest

• Lighthouse CI

• LoadRunner

• Locust

• Loki

• Mabl

• Micro Focus Silk Test

• Microsoft Playwright Testing

• NeoLoad

• New Relic Synthetics

• Nightwatch.js

• OWASP ZAP

• Pa11y

• Percy

• Perfecto

• Pingdom

• Playwright

• Playwright Component Testing

• Playwright Test

• Protractor (deprecated)

• QA Wolf

• Ranorex

• Robot Framework + SeleniumLibrary

• Sahi Pro

• Sauce Labs

• Selene (Yashaka)

• Selenide

• Selenium

• Serenity BDD

• Squish

• Storybook Test Runner

• Taiko

• TestCafe

• TestCafe Studio

• Testim

• Tricentis Tosca

• UFT One (formerly QTP)

• Virtuoso

• Vitest

• Watir

• WebdriverIO

• axe-core / axe DevTools

• k6

• reg-suit

• testRigor

Why look for TestComplete alternatives?

• Cost and licensing model: Commercial licensing may not suit startup budgets or large-scale parallelization.

• Tech stack alignment: Teams may prefer JS/TS or other language-centric ecosystems for tests-as-code and developer workflows.

• Cloud-first needs: Device/browser clouds, hosted runners, and SaaS analytics may be easier to scale and maintain.

• Specialized testing: Visual, performance, security (DAST), accessibility, component testing, and synthetics often require purpose-built tools.

• Maintenance and flakiness: Poorly structured UI tests can become flaky; some teams seek frameworks with auto-waits, better locators, or self-healing.

• Speed and developer ergonomics: Modern frameworks offer fast execution, rich debuggers, trace viewers, and tight CI/CD integration.

Detailed breakdown of alternatives

Appium

• What it is: OSS mobile UI automation for iOS/Android/mobile web; by the Appium community.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Better for native mobile at scale; more setup required.

Applitools Eyes

• What it is: AI-powered visual testing for web/mobile/desktop; by Applitools.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Adds visual AI; complements functional suites.

Artillery

• What it is: Performance/load testing (YAML/JS); by Artillery.io.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Purpose-built for performance, not UI automation.

BackstopJS

• What it is: Visual regression testing for the web; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focuses on visuals; pairs with functional tools.

BitBar

• What it is: Real device/browser cloud; by SmartBear.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Cloud execution grid rather than authoring IDE.

BlazeMeter

• What it is: SaaS performance/load platform; BlazeMeter.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Dedicated performance testing and analytics.

BrowserStack Automate

• What it is: Cloud for cross-browser/mobile automation; by BrowserStack.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: A grid backend, not a scripting IDE.

Burp Suite (Enterprise)

• What it is: Enterprise DAST for web/API; by PortSwigger.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Security-focused; complements functional tests.

Capybara

• What it is: Web E2E library for Ruby; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first; ideal for Ruby-based teams.

Checkly

• What it is: Synthetics and browser checks as code; by Checkly.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: SaaS synthetics; lightweight checks over IDE.

Cucumber

• What it is: BDD with Gherkin; open source (Cucumber OSS).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: BDD layer; pairs with runners like Selenium/Playwright.

Cypress

• What it is: Web E2E framework with rich DX; by Cypress.io.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first, browser-native runner; great developer experience.

Cypress Cloud

• What it is: SaaS parallelization/insights for Cypress; by Cypress.io.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution/analytics layer for Cypress projects.

Cypress Component Testing

• What it is: Component tests in real browsers; by Cypress.io.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Component-level focus vs. E2E suite.

Datadog Synthetic Tests

• What it is: Browser/API synthetics; by Datadog.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Production monitoring vs. dev/test authoring.

Eggplant Test

• What it is: Model-based testing with AI/CV; by Keysight.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Strong CV and model-based capabilities.

FitNesse

• What it is: Acceptance testing wiki framework; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: ATDD/acceptance focus; complements UI tools.

Functionize

• What it is: AI-assisted E2E for web/mobile; Functionize.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Emphasizes AI for locator stability.

Gatling

• What it is: Performance/load testing; by Gatling Corp.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Performance-only; not UI automation.

Gauge

• What it is: BDD-like E2E framework; by ThoughtWorks.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-focused with spec docs.

Geb

• What it is: Groovy/Spock web automation DSL; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first; ideal for Groovy/Java teams.

Happo

• What it is: Component visual regression; Happo.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Visual components vs. UI E2E steps.

IBM Rational Functional Tester

• What it is: Enterprise UI automation; by IBM.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar enterprise focus; legacy strengths.

JMeter

• What it is: Performance/load testing; Apache OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Built for performance, not UI flows.

Jest

• What it is: JS unit/component/e2e-lite; by the community (originated at Meta).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Unit/component emphasis; pairs with E2E.

Karate

• What it is: API and UI testing DSL; Karate Labs/community.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Strong API + UI hybrid in code.

Katalon Platform (Studio)

• What it is: Low-code E2E for web/mobile/API/desktop; by Katalon.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar low-code suite; broader built-in reporting.

Kobiton

• What it is: Real mobile device cloud; Kobiton.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Cloud device lab vs. local authoring.

LambdaTest

• What it is: Cross-browser/mobile testing cloud; LambdaTest.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution platform rather than IDE.

Lighthouse CI

• What it is: Web audits for perf/a11y/SEO; by the community (Google Lighthouse).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Audits rather than functional E2E.

LoadRunner

• What it is: Enterprise load testing; by OpenText.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Performance-focused enterprise suite.

Locust

• What it is: Python-based load testing; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Load testing only; code-first.

Loki

• What it is: Storybook visual regression; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Component visuals vs. E2E automation.

Mabl

• What it is: Low-code AI-powered web/API testing; Mabl.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: SaaS-first with strong AI assistance.

Micro Focus Silk Test

• What it is: Enterprise UI automation; Micro Focus (OpenText).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar category; legacy enterprise coverage.

Microsoft Playwright Testing

• What it is: Managed cloud service for Playwright runs; Microsoft.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Cloud execution for Playwright, not IDE authoring.

NeoLoad

• What it is: Enterprise performance testing; by Tricentis.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Performance-only with enterprise depth.

New Relic Synthetics

• What it is: Scripted browser/API synthetics; New Relic.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Production monitoring vs. dev/test authoring.

Nightwatch.js

• What it is: JS E2E over WebDriver/DevTools; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first JS alternative.

OWASP ZAP

• What it is: DAST security scanner; OWASP.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Security scanning; complements UI tests.

Pa11y

• What it is: CLI accessibility testing; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Accessibility audits, not UI authoring.

Percy

• What it is: Visual testing platform; by BrowserStack (Percy).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Visual regression focus; pairs with E2E.

Perfecto

• What it is: Enterprise device/browser cloud; Perfecto.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution lab, not authoring IDE.

Pingdom

• What it is: Uptime and transaction monitoring; Pingdom.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Production checks vs. QA automation.

Playwright

• What it is: OSS E2E for Chromium/Firefox/WebKit; by Microsoft.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first, modern, very fast runner.

Playwright Component Testing

• What it is: Component-first testing; by Microsoft/community.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Component scope vs. full E2E suite.

Playwright Test

• What it is: First-class Playwright test runner; by Microsoft.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Lightweight, code-centric runner.

Protractor (deprecated)

• What it is: Angular E2E framework; deprecated (Google Angular).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Deprecated; migrate to Playwright/Cypress.

QA Wolf

• What it is: E2E testing as a service; QA Wolf.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Outsourced authoring/execution model.

Ranorex

• What it is: Codeless/scripted E2E for desktop/web/mobile; Ranorex.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Very similar category and capabilities.

Robot Framework + SeleniumLibrary

• What it is: Keyword-driven test automation; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Keyword-driven but open-source and code-friendly.

Sahi Pro

• What it is: E2E for web/desktop; Sahi Pro (Tyto).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar goals; strong for complex UIs.

Sauce Labs

• What it is: Cloud for browsers/devices; Sauce Labs.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Execution cloud; pair with your framework.

Selene (Yashaka)

• What it is: Python wrapper over Selenium; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first Python alternative.

Selenide

• What it is: Java wrapper over Selenium; OSS (Codeborne).

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first Java approach.

Selenium

• What it is: De facto WebDriver standard; SeleniumHQ.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Foundation layer; requires framework glue.

Serenity BDD

• What it is: BDD/E2E with reporting; by Serenity/Thucydides.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first BDD with strong reporting.

Squish

• What it is: GUI automation for Qt/QML/web/desktop/embedded; froglogic.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Stronger for Qt/embedded UIs.

Storybook Test Runner

• What it is: Test Storybook stories with Playwright; Storybook.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Component-level, not full E2E journeys.

Taiko

• What it is: Node.js E2E for Chromium; by ThoughtWorks.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Lightweight JS alternative.

TestCafe

• What it is: E2E web testing without WebDriver; by DevExpress.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Code-first, simpler setup for web.

TestCafe Studio

• What it is: Codeless IDE for TestCafe; by DevExpress.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar codeless authoring for web.

Testim

• What it is: AI-assisted E2E for web; by SmartBear.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: AI-enhanced low-code from same vendor family.

Tricentis Tosca

• What it is: Model-based E2E (web/mobile/desktop/SAP); Tricentis.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Enterprise MBTA with deep SAP.

UFT One (formerly QTP)

• What it is: Enterprise functional UI testing; by OpenText.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Similar enterprise suite; long legacy.

Virtuoso

• What it is: AI-assisted web/mobile E2E; Virtuoso.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Focus on natural-language authoring.

Vitest

• What it is: Vite-native unit/component runner; by the community.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Unit/component scope; complements E2E.

Watir

• What it is: Ruby-based web automation; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Ruby code-first alternative.

WebdriverIO

• What it is: Modern JS/TS E2E over WebDriver/DevTools/Appium; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Highly extensible JS framework.

axe-core / axe DevTools

• What it is: Accessibility testing engine/tools; by Deque.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Accessibility audits; complements UI suites.

k6

• What it is: Dev-friendly performance/load testing; by Grafana Labs.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Perf/load focused; not UI.

reg-suit

• What it is: CI-friendly visual regression tool; OSS.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: Visual regression only; complements E2E.

testRigor

• What it is: Natural-language E2E for web/mobile; testRigor.

• Strengths:

• Compared to TestComplete: NL-based authoring vs. traditional IDE.

Things to consider before choosing a TestComplete alternative

• Application scope and platforms: Web, mobile (iOS/Android), desktop, SAP/legacy, embedded, or a mix.

• Programming language and team skills: JS/TS, Java, Python, C#, Ruby, or low-code/NLP preferences.

• Authoring model: Codeless/low-code vs. code-first vs. BDD/specification-driven.

• Execution speed and reliability: Auto-waits, trace viewer, flake reduction, retries, and parallelism.

• CI/CD integration: Native plugins, containers, cloud runners, and test orchestration.

• Debugging and observability: Videos, screenshots, traces, network logs, and console logs.

• Ecosystem and community: Plugins, reusable libraries, documentation, and support channels.

• Scalability: Ability to scale across devices/browsers, distributed load, and concurrency limits.

• Cost and licensing: Open-source viability, commercial support needs, cloud usage costs, and ROI.

• Specialized needs: Visual regression, accessibility, performance, security, or synthetics monitoring.

Conclusion

TestComplete remains a capable, widely used suite for UI test automation across desktop, web, and mobile—especially for teams that want a commercial product with codeless options and scripting flexibility. That said, today’s QA landscape is broader and more specialized. You might prefer:

• Code-first web E2E with strong DX: Playwright, Cypress, WebdriverIO, Selenium-based stacks.

• Real device/browser clouds: BrowserStack Automate, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, BitBar, Kobiton, LambdaTest.

• AI/low-code acceleration: Mabl, Testim, Functionize, Virtuoso, testRigor, Katalon.

• Visual regression: Applitools Eyes, Percy, BackstopJS, Happo, Loki, reg-suit.

• Performance/load: k6, Gatling, JMeter, Artillery, Locust, NeoLoad, LoadRunner, BlazeMeter.

• Accessibility: axe-core/axe DevTools, Lighthouse CI, Pa11y.

• Security (DAST): OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite (Enterprise).

• Synthetics/monitoring: Checkly, Datadog Synthetic Tests, New Relic Synthetics, Pingdom.

• Enterprise functional/legacy coverage: UFT One, Micro Focus Silk Test, IBM RFT, Tricentis Tosca, Squish.

Pick the stack that aligns with your tech, skills, and goals. Many teams combine a primary E2E framework (e.g., Playwright or Cypress) with a cloud execution grid, plus specialized tools for visual, performance, accessibility, and security. With a thoughtful mix, you’ll reduce flakiness, speed up feedback, and gain confidence in quality—while controlling costs and complexity.