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

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
27th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (18th), API Testing Tools (16th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 1.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.4%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.4%
IBM Rational Test Workbench1.7%
Other92.9%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Specialist, ITE at a government with 10,001+ employees
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.
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

"Using service virtualization, we are able to accelerate the testing and development activity."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"All IBM testing tools are really well integrated."
"IBM Rational integrates the testing software as Rational Test Workbench, which is quite convenient and efficient as it is able to automate the test scripts."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"Even with my limited programming knowledge, I was able to create automation tests using the Keyword Test feature."
"Technical support is excellent, and if you reach out to them, they will get back to you within 24 hours."
"This tool is very easy to use and very powerful."
"It helped to automate all the possible functional test cases which I previously used to do by manual testing."
"The Object Spy has surpassed any other "spy" tools I have ever used."
"Selenium integration."
"This is the best tool for GUI and Web Automation."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool, and it also has valuable regression testing."
 

Cons

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there."
"Rational Performance Tester supports cloud technology in the version 8.7, playing test scripts back on the cloud is not stable."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"Implementing custom functions is bit tedious job, as ECMA script does not support some of the standard java-script functions, Also the Script editor window is not user friendly."
"I would like to see improved language support, with Python being my first choice."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"I pay for support and maintenance; having used the “support” functions through online forums, I can say there is room for improvement."
"We did not maximize our ROI until we put somebody full-time on our TestComplete endeavours. The tool does have a learning curve, and it wasn't until we had an in-house expert on it that we began to see the benefits of automated testing over traditional QA roles."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"The product is becoming more and more expensive."
"We have a TestComplete 12 license."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"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."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
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

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.