CucumberStudio vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

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

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, ServiceNow and others in Rapid Application Development Software.
To learn more, read our detailed Rapid Application Development Software Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 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 data table that helps in converting a single script to multiple test cases is very helpful.""The best thing is that a person without knowledge about the program can easily understand what happened in our testing process."

More CucumberStudio Pros →

"The JIRA integration is really important to us because it allows our business analysts to see test results inside the JIRA ticket and that we have met the definition of "done," and have made sure we tested to the requirements of the story.""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 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.""Works well for test management and is a good testing repository.""The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well.""I like the way it structures a project... We're able to put the test cases into qTest or modify something that's already there, so it's a reusable-type of environment. It is very important that we can do that and change our test data as needed...""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.""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."

More Tricentis qTest Pros →

Cons
"I think it would be better if we could also do the reporting with CucumberStudio.""The reporting needs to be improved."

More CucumberStudio Cons →

"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.""Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum.""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 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.""You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency.""I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that.""The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."

More Tricentis qTest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "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 Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The best thing is that a person without knowledge about the program can easily understand what happened in our testing process.
    Top Answer:Presently, when I work with Selenium, I need CucumberStudio just to make my project readable to other people, and for reporting, I use Maven. I think it would be better if we could also do the… more »
    Top Answer:I recommend the solution as it's easy to use. I rate the solution seven out of ten.
    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
    Views
    28
    Comparisons
    13
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    378
    Rating
    7.0
    6th
    Views
    2,112
    Comparisons
    1,288
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    761
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Hiptest
    qTest
    Learn More
    SmartBear
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Formerly HipTest: CucumberStudio is the leading collaboration platform for BDD - an easy-to-use tool to define ideas, test code, and learn in production from real-time insight.

    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
    Cisco, Cardinal Health, Intuit, Smartbox, Accenture, Deliveroo
    McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Educational Organization10%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Comms Service Provider7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Insurance Company18%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business27%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise57%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Rapid Application Development Software
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, ServiceNow and others in Rapid Application Development Software. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CucumberStudio is ranked 28th in Rapid Application Development Software with 8 reviews while Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. CucumberStudio is rated 8.2, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CucumberStudio writes "An easy -to -use scalable cloud-based solution which needs some improvement with programming automation and stability". 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". CucumberStudio is most compared with GitHub CoPilot, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS.

    We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software 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.