Eggplant Test vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Keysight Technologies Logo
451 views|255 comparisons
Tricentis Logo
2,112 views|1,288 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Eggplant Test and Tricentis qTest 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Eggplant Test vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 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
"DAI's newest release allows us to test via scripts rather than models, because we have done 95 percent of our development in functional, not through modeling. I am really happy that then we can use the controller to run scripts rather than having to translate things to models. There are lots of options.""The main feature of Eggplant Test is that it can do fully automated web testing and app testing.""Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level.""Its scalability is good. It is useful for desktop applications, and it also uses OCR and does image recognition.""The solution is a stable one.""The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests.""The most valuable feature is the ability to create code from a flow chart, and then run the code through it.""The solution is based on a Windows model, where adding users is just a few clicks. It is easy to manage users and add them."

More Eggplant Test 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.""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.""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...""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.""The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless.""UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."

More Tricentis qTest Pros →

Cons
"In terms of additional features, it would be helpful to have one package for all testing. You have the manager, the AI, then you have functional, and about 10 different packages for installing.""We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution.""Its performance and stability could be better.""The IDE could be even more full-featured. Because I was a developer, I was very spoiled by either Visual Studio Code or Visual Studio for shortcuts. For example, I was able to say "ctor" and hit Tab and it would create a template of a constructor for me... It would be great, when I want to create a new function, if there were shortcut commands like those that helped create all of the functions, or if there were shortcut features to do any of the complex plans.""It has low productivity.""Eggplant Test should emphasize on improving its offering in non-Windows environments.""They need to update the Linux. I think it's kind of an outdated Java Swing application.""A step forward would be to have event support, because it is more or less linear at the moment."

More Eggplant Test Cons →

"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.""Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum.""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.""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 would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me.""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.""Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users.""I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use. ALM's... Defects Module is really robust. You can actually walk through each defect by just clicking an arrow... But with the qTest Defects module you can't do that. You have to run a query. You're pretty much just querying a database. It's not really a module, or at least a robust module. Everything is very manual."

More Tricentis qTest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is scalable, but it is a matter of money in the pocket. You can scale it, but then you have to have additional licenses. The licensing approach of eggPlant is not the best."
  • "Make a smart decision about the number of developer- and execution-only licenses you purchase to maximize your budget. We found that going heavier on execution-only licenses has been a way to reduce our costs and maximize our ability to benefit from the software."
  • "End-to-end testing isn't possible for us because of the licensing problems. It's very expensive, so we only have two development/execution licenses."
  • "It probably has a yearly license."
  • "This solution is expensive when compared to the market. However, the reason it is more expensive is because of its stability, high performance, and for its support of any technology."
  • "Eggplant Test is a very expensive solution."
  • More Eggplant Test 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.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology.
    Top Answer:Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence could improve by lowering the price.
    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
    7th
    Views
    451
    Comparisons
    255
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    477
    Rating
    7.4
    6th
    Views
    2,112
    Comparisons
    1,288
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    761
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence, Eggplant DAI, Eggplant Automation Cloud, Eggplant Manager, Eggplant Mobile, Eggplant Customer Experience Insights
    qTest
    Learn More
    Overview

    Across every industry, digital transformation is top of mind. New methods of developing software are driving fast change, and test teams are feeling the pressure. Increasing demand to release faster while maintaining the highest levels of quality is making the testing process more complex and harder to scale.

    With AI-powered testing, Eggplant’s test and automation intelligence delivers the coverage you need to optimize the user experience, speed up release cycles, and improve your quality assurance process. Discover a fast, secure, and easy-to-use solution that tests any kind of software on any platform or device.

    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
    FUJIFILM Group, NEC Personal Computers
    McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company29%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm14%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Insurance Company18%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise72%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise73%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Eggplant Test vs. Tricentis qTest
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Eggplant Test vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Eggplant Test is ranked 7th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews while Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". 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". Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and froglogic Squish, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS. See our Eggplant Test vs. Tricentis qTest 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.