We performed a comparison between TFS and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like the build management features and the integration with Jenkins and many other tools."
"Microsoft's technical team is supportive."
"It is easy to push our changes from quality to pre-prod and prod."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is integration."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is the central repository, and you can see what changes other developers did from which branch."
"The biggest value-add is the solution integrates well with most Microsoft products."
"Version Control: TFS offers both the centralized “TFVC” version control technology as well as the distributed “Git” version control technology."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"It is a good and user-friendly tool."
"The solution is very stable."
"One of the best documentation in the world."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"The most valuable features of Visual Studio Test Professional are the IntelliSense and the ease of adding the NuGet packages."
"The solution is easy to use and they have also integrated with Microsoft."
"Visual Studio is highly powerful. It's probably the best software development tool on the market."
"It's great for the development of .NET."
"It would be better if we could bring it out on the cloud."
"They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA."
"The dashboard needs more enhancements."
"The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved."
"The execution of test cases could stand improvement."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"The overall reports in TFS could improve. Additionally, there should be an easier way to migrate from an older version to a newer one."
"More options could be provided from the perspective of requirements management, which would help product owners to use the tool effectively."
"Sometimes, the product is too complex to use."
"The performance could be faster."
"The price could be improved."
"I would like to see more integration in the solution."
"The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
TFS is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 93 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 48 reviews. TFS is rated 8.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, TestRail and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete, Tricentis Tosca and TestRail. See our TFS vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.