PractiTest vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
PractiTest Logo
493 views|371 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Tricentis Logo
2,029 views|1,251 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between PractiTest and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."

More PractiTest Pros →

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.""The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good.""What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature.""UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem.""Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer.""The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself.""The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless.""The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

More Tricentis qTest Pros →

Cons
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."

More PractiTest Cons →

"The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved.""qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order.""The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better.""Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum.""We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features. The JIRA integration with qTest needs to mature a lot... We need smarter execution with JIRA in the case of failures, so that the way we pull out the issues again for the next round is easy... Locating JIRA defects corresponding to a trait from the test results is something of a challenge.""The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented.""The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique.""As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."

More Tricentis qTest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
  • More PractiTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
  • "Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
  • "It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
  • "We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."
  • "We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."
  • "We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."
  • "For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."
  • "For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."
  • More Tricentis qTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.
    Top Answer:Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.
    Top Answer:The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall… more »
    Ranking
    14th
    Views
    493
    Comparisons
    371
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    6th
    Views
    2,029
    Comparisons
    1,251
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    761
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    qTest
    Learn More
    Overview

    Manage your QA and Testing process, controlling your testing tasks while getting complete visibility into your results, and most importantly releasing your products in a professional way

    Professional end to end QA management for your manual and automation testing. 
    • Create your manual tests and organize them based on cycles, sprints, etc.
    • Seamlessly integrate your manual testing with your automation and CI processes.
    • Reuse tests and correlate results across different releases and products.
    • Release your products with confidence and control.


    Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality. 

    Sample Customers
    Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
    McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Insurance Company18%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise57%
    Large Enterprise14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise71%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Management Tools
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    PractiTest is ranked 14th in Test Management Tools while Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. PractiTest is rated 8.8, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of PractiTest writes "Offers one click graphical dashboard reports and advanced customization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis qTest writes "Puts all our test cases in one location where everyone can see them. qTest also allows the segregation of different types of Testing". PractiTest is most compared with TestRail, Jira, Zephyr Enterprise and Microsoft Azure DevOps, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS.

    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.