FitNesse vs. TestComplete

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
FitNesse
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
FitNesse is an open source fully integrated standalone wiki web server and acceptance testing framework.N/A
TestComplete
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
TestComplete is a GUI test automation tool that enables users of all skill levels to test the UI of every desktop, web, and mobile application. TestComplete is best suited for testers, automation engineers, and QA teams in any industry.
$2,256
per license
Pricing
FitNesseTestComplete
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Node-Locked Base
2,256
per license
Node-Locked Pro
3,950
per license
Float - Base
5,077
per license
Float - Pro
7,901
per license
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
FitNesseTestComplete
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsPay for only the modules needed. TestComplete Pro includes all three modules: desktop, web, and mobile, at a bundled price point, as well as access to the parallel testing engine, TestExecute. TestComplete has additional add-ons, including TestExecute and the Intelligent Quality Add-On.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
FitNesseTestComplete
Best Alternatives
FitNesseTestComplete
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
FitNesseTestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
8.5
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.8
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
6.6
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
6.7
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
FitNesseTestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
Useful and straightforward. Appian and other low-code BCM tools can be easily integrated. Writing a script for a test is similar to writing a script in English. So simple to use because it's a wrapper class for selenium. FitNesse is being implemented with the goal of doing it correctly the first time. As a result, migrations of both the client and the server are made easier.
Read full review
Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched
Read full review
Pros
  • This program makes it simple to do both integration and acceptability testing.
  • FitNesse was a huge asset to us when it came to rule testing.
  • Scripting with command language is simple.
Read full review
  • TestComplete is great for working with our non-web applications.
  • TestComplete allows us to interface with our web application in a robust way.
  • Despite the age of our architecture, TestComplete handles the old stuff that's been around a while as well as the newer technology when we are able to implement it.
Read full review
Cons
  • Limitations with rich text fields.
  • FitNesse cannot properly read the interface if labels or accessibility text is not available.
  • Not used for Web interface testing.
Read full review
  • Would love to see TC be a plugin for Visual Studio. Instead of VBScript or JavaScript, to use C# or VB.NET
  • Easier to set up with iOS. Android is not bad but iOS seems slow and confusing to get up and running
  • Built-in PDF reading support, built in Excel API
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
The FitNesse testing automation framework is very simple to operate. It is simple to connect with the Jenkins and Bamboo environments. It is dependable, and it is simple and quick to include new tests. The process of debugging and fixing test failures is straightforward. FitNesse, including its installation, may be utilized with a minimum of fuss and difficulty. Maintaining scripts and monitoring their output is designed to be a relatively straightforward process.
Read full review
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Saves developer time on regression testing.
  • Developers can spend time on other prioritizes while FitNesse runs regression testing.
  • Transitioning into another testing platform would be costly.
Read full review
  • Improved product quality overall, since automating tedious tests frees up time and is not prone to fatigue
  • When getting started - depending on the complexity of the software/UI tested - it can be a time sink before it brings actual value, and changes to the structure of the UI need to be communicated early, so the changes can be implemented on time to run the automation
  • Once set up, the maintenance cost is low, and the automation frees up a lot of resources especially in an agile environment where there are a lot of releases that would need regression tests.
Read full review
ScreenShots