We performed a comparison between Adaptavist Test Management for Jira and TestRail based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."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."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Integration with Confluence and JIRA."
"The API to support integration of the homemade automated testing tool."
"The most valuable features are the reporting in the dashboard and the general way in which we can create test runs is helpful."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility, ease of use for writing new test cases, the test plans, and the composition."
"From a testing perspective, the management is awesome. I am able to do testing and then add the reporting and the evidence. It is fair in terms of the price that you're paying. You get what you're paying for."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the UI. The structure of test cases is easy to understand."
"The most valuable features of TestRail by Gurock are the user experience, it's very easy to learn. There is no learning curve needed to work on projects and manage the test cases, it is easy. Exporting and importing are simple."
"The solution is very stable. We've never had any issues with it."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"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."
"It would be nice if they would add an export to Word."
"The reports should be more user-friendly."
"The product is not focused on synthetic data creation. I would also like to see more integrations with other platforms."
"The platform needs improvement regarding performance and creating links."
"It's not easy to create a custom report. It's not straightforward. A good improvement would be if there was a way to report and create a custom report without using a plugin or scripting language."
"Reporting could be more flexible regarding repeating reports."
"TestRail by Gurock could improve by adding a defect management module tool. It would add a lot of value if I want to install it and I don't have Jira or an isolating team. For example, if I am providing a service it's separated from the development team, it then would be better to have defect management included with the test management. However, as it is now I need to be integrated with Jira or another defect management tool to complete the testing process."
"The TestRail API to integrate reporting of automated tests is complete, but requires many requests to identify the appropriate entry."
More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 10th in Test Management Tools with 4 reviews while TestRail is ranked 3rd in Test Management Tools with 21 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.2, while TestRail is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "Integrates with any automation tool, but the granular reporting feature should be more intuitive ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TestRail writes "A tool that provides effective test management and real-time reporting capabilities". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest, TFS and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer, whereas TestRail is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, TFS, Tricentis qTest, Sealights and Tricentis Tosca.
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.