Anonymous UserSr. Project Manager at University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."
"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."
"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."
"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."
"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
Earn 20 points
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is the full, featured, enterprise ready test management solution directly in Jira. It offers full traceability across issues, requirements, test cases, and execution. The tool allows for flexibility and customisation for test plans and runs. It offers a free and flexible REST API, includes the ability to automate bulk tests, and enables seamless integration with most continuous integration tools. The in-depth reporting capability gives users the ability to analyse and share test data results between development and business teams. It’s the single source of truth to track, manage and optimise your whole test lifecycle right inside Jira software.
Try it now https://marketplace.atlassian....
See the overview video
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 10th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews while Inflectra SpiraTest is ranked 9th in Test Management Tools with 3 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.6, while Inflectra SpiraTest is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "A good repository for test cases, but query capability should be integrated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Inflectra SpiraTest writes "User friendly with ease of testing requirements management, migration from other tools and als othe integration with other testing tools". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TestRail by Gurock, TFS, Tricentis qTest and Silk Central, whereas Inflectra SpiraTest is most compared with Jira, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, TestRail by Gurock, Micro Focus ALM Octane and Tricentis Tosca. See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Inflectra SpiraTest 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.