Short answer: Testim is the right choice for an established QA team that wants to keep owning a structured test suite and make it less brittle. Testmode is the right choice when you want tests without owning a suite at all.

Testim built its reputation on smart locators — using AI to identify elements by many attributes at once, so a test does not break the moment a class name changes. It is a well-engineered answer to the flakiness problem, and it is now part of Tricentis.

At a glance

	Testim	Testmode
How a test is created	Record and edit steps, with optional JavaScript	Write what to test in plain English
Where AI is applied	Locating elements reliably	Interpreting and carrying out the test
Custom logic	JavaScript steps for anything the UI cannot express	Described in the same sentence
Who maintains the suite	A QA team	Whoever wrote the sentence
Fits an existing QA process	Designed for it	Works without one
Cost model	Commercial product	Commercial product

Where Testim is the better tool

You have a QA team that wants control. Testim assumes a suite someone owns and curates. If that is your setup, it fits the way you already work.
You need custom logic inside a test. JavaScript steps are an escape hatch for anything a visual editor cannot express — computed values, unusual assertions, integrations mid-flow.
You are already in the Tricentis ecosystem. If you use Tricentis tooling elsewhere, staying inside it has real integration value.
Your flows are stable and heavily reused. Shared steps and grouped components pay off when many tests overlap.

The difference in where the AI sits

This is the substantive distinction, and it is worth being precise about.

Testim applies AI to the hardest part of a recorded test: finding the right element on the page, run after run, as the markup shifts. The test itself is still a defined sequence of steps that a person authored and maintains.

Testmode applies AI a level up. There is no step sequence to maintain. The test is the sentence, and the AI decides at run time what to do to satisfy it — which element to use, and what counts as the flow having worked.

Both reduce maintenance. Testim reduces the cost of each step breaking. Testmode removes the step list that breaks.

Where Testmode fits better

You do not have a QA team. Testim is built for people whose job is testing. Testmode is usable by people whose job is something else.
Tests should be written by whoever knows the requirement. No recording session, no editor, no shared-component structure to learn first.
The application is redesigned often. Smart locators survive attribute changes well. They do not survive a flow being restructured.
You want to start today. Point Testmode at a URL and describe a test.

The honest summary

Testim is the more configurable tool and the better fit for a mature QA function that wants to keep its suite.

Testmode is for teams where that function does not exist. If the realistic alternative is manual testing, the question is not which suite to own — it is how to get tests running without owning one.