Tricentis qTest Overview

Tricentis qTest is the #3 ranked solution in our list of top Quality Management Tools. It is most often compared to Tricentis Tosca: Tricentis qTest vs Tricentis Tosca

What is Tricentis qTest?

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. 

Tricentis qTest is also known as qTest.

Tricentis qTest Buyer's Guide

Download the Tricentis qTest Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: July 2021

Tricentis qTest Customers

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Tricentis qTest Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Tricentis qTest pricing:
  • "Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
  • "For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."
  • "We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."
  • "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."
  • "The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
  • "It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

Filter Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
RyanO'Neill
Sr. Manager Quality Assurance at Forcepoint LLC (Formerly Raytheon|Websense)
Real User
Top 20
Provides a central point of reference for tracking bugs and failures, who owns the issue and its status

What is our primary use case?

I use it for test case management. I manage testers and I use qTest in order to schedule and track test case execution within my testing group. We're on the cloud version.

Pros and Cons

  • "The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."
  • "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."

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson I have learned is that the transitioning process is only difficult if you drag it out. Transitioning over to a new product needs to happen quickly. It needs to be a top-down decision and the information needs to be disseminated to everybody in a quick and efficient manner. We saw that happen easily with the qTest product and that sold me on the lesson that I learned, when it comes to implementing new, global-enterprise software. qTest is a great solution. It should definitely be at the top of your list when you're looking at test case management solutions. It's really the…
RobinaLaughlin
Assistant Vice President, IT Quality Assurance at Guardian Life Insurance
Real User
Top 20
Very much a QA-centric application; using it is pretty seamless if you're a QA engineer

What is our primary use case?

It's our primary tool for managing for testing across the Guardian enterprise.

Pros and Cons

  • "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 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."

What other advice do I have?

What I've learned from using the solution is "don't be afraid of change." HP was the blockbuster of our industry. There are a lot of great options out there. Do your due diligence and be brave. Also, have a plan. It's not something that you want to go into and figure out as you're going. You need to really sit down and consider where you are, where you want to go, what variables are going to help you figure out how to implement this. It's just like any other software package. You need to need to have a plan. You need to have a training plan. You need to make sure your team understands the…
Learn what your peers think about Tricentis qTest. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2021.
521,637 professionals have used our research since 2012.
NancyMcClanahan
Quality Assurance Team Lead at Parkview Health
Real User
Top 20
Puts all our test cases in one location where everyone can see them. qTest also allows the segregation of different types of Testing.

What is our primary use case?

When I first started here, my goal was to get a test case management tool. The testers were using spreadsheets, so the idea was to set up a strategy and plan to not only create a testing process, but to provide a way to improve that testing process. One of my suggestions was that we get a tool that allows us to be ready for the future, as we get to automation. Now after all the manual testing we have moved to Cloud Application testing for 3rd party Cloud solutions and also complete testing for our Electronic Medical Records system and integrations. It has allowed use to expand the Quality… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "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..."
  • "Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

What other advice do I have?

Make sure you set it up the way you do your business. The process is essential, not just the tool that you're using to manage it. The biggest lesson I have learned from using qTest is that I should have used it years ago. We should have had this a long time ago, not just five years ago. I send out periodical reports of all the metrics that we do, usually twice a year. We use other tools for keeping track of tasks that have to be done on each one of the projects. We use Microsoft Planner. It makes it easier for people to actually do their assignments and then let us know that the tasks are…
DF
Senior Director of Quality Engineering at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Gives us more efficiencies and overall improvement in transparency and visibility of the testing progress

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is to the overall testing process and management of our test cases, as far as the design, creation, review, and archiving of them goes. We use it to manage their overall status. We are cloud users, so we've got the latest and greatest version. They transparently push updates to us.

Pros and Cons

  • "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 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."

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson I've learned from using the solution, because of the Insights challenge, is that I would probably do more of a formal trial. They are aware there are issues with it, and they are going to work on it. Absolutely use it for its test management capabilities, without a doubt, but have an alternative solution for your reporting metrics. Your testing using the tool is not going to change the result of the testing. It's just that the means are more efficient. Our testing scope has been the same and our processes have all been the same. But we're implementing a tool that's a little…
Raja-Veeraraghavan
Automation Lead at LogiXML
Real User
Top 20
We're spending less time trying to find defects and doing manual testing

What is our primary use case?

We have licenses for qTest Manager and Flood. We use Flood for performance testing. We use the Manager on a day-to-day basis for storing the test cases and linking them with the NPM, with the Selenium automation test cases, and we schedule runs through qTest. We also have Jira Cloud and connectivity using the CI/CD pipeline. We connect qTest with Jira and set up our runtime and regression automation. Manual is done using just the Manager and the automation is done using Selenium and Selenide. All the user stories are done in JIRA. We take those user stories from JIRA and input them into qTest… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What other advice do I have?

Go for it, take a shot at it. Try it out with the 30-day free trial. If you really find it to be a good fit for your company, the productivity and the cost, go ahead and choose it. It's definitely a good tool. The biggest thing we've learned from this tool is the ease of using it. It is easier. There is a possibility of creating the entire application lifecycle management by moving around different tabs and moving around different options. With one screen it is easy for a QA person to get into it. We have not used Insights that much. We have used it to some extent but we haven't gone into the…
JK
Testing Lead Manager at PDC Energy
Real User
Helps us resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location

What is our primary use case?

We are using qTest to store and house test scripts and test design. We're using the test execution to execute and we're using the Defects module to track defects.

Pros and Cons

  • "qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."
  • "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."

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson I have learned from using qTest is that every tool has limitations and you need to be able to adapt and overcome and not be stuck with one way of doing things. You have to find out where the tool shines and where it doesn't and make sure that the team feels the least amount of pain when you do implement it. This solution has been implemented for one particular project. We have 60 concurrent licenses available and we have about 120 users who have been given access. Their roles in the project are either business analysts or quality testers. But these people also have their…
VSwaminathan
Product QA Manager at Reflexis Systems
Real User
Top 20
Provides us with visibility into test results as well as better accountability within the QA team

What is our primary use case?

We have multiple teams working at Reflexis and test management is a critical aspect. We wanted to be able to maintain tests. We have multiple releases to be sent to customers and to internal teams. We use JIRA for defect management and for our internal project-tracking purposes, but for test management we primarily use qTest.

Pros and Cons

  • "The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."
  • "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."

What other advice do I have?

Do a cost-benefit analysis. qTest is more costly than other tools. If you have multiple teams, it's going to be essential, and it's worth buying qTest. Apart from that, if cost is not a factor, there are more benefits from qTest and it's definitely a tool you can go for. All the features we have used are pretty impressive and good. The JIRA integration is the only thing that, if it is very critical, you need to plan accordingly. It's a good investment for the implementation of the QA process. It creates more accountability in the team and also makes a lot of things easy for the managers as…
MD
Manager, IT Quality Assurance (EDM/ITSRC/Infrastructure) at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Integration with JIRA makes all test cases available to anybody in the company with JIRA access

What is our primary use case?

qTest is our test case management tool.

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."
  • "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."

What other advice do I have?

It's a simple tool. The usability is pretty straightforward. For a QA tester who is an active user, the UI is pretty simple, the linkage of requirements to test case is simple, and there is searchability of test case across the project. Overall, it's better than Quality Center in the ways that I have explained. My suggestion would be to always put your use cases up-front with vendors whose tools you're looking at. Ask for a demo and make sure that your use cases match up to the demo that's being performed. We had some challenges with JIRA and the Quality Center integration, real-time…
See 2 more Tricentis qTest Reviews