ACCELQ vs. Zephyr Scale

ACCELQ can support multiple technologies such as web, mobile, API, and mainframe. It’s also suited for SAAS solutions such as Salesforce and addresses challenges such as dynamic HTML. It’s easy to set up, and onboarding is easy, and overall lead time is comparatively less. The overall execution results are captured with screenshots, and it’s easy to debug errors. It has integrations with leading cloud-based desktop and mobile farm services such as Saucelabs, browser stack, etc.; ACCELQ is not developer friendly, and hence the overall adoption for a continuous integration scenario is very limited. If you are using a different test management solution, the integration between accelQ and that tool needs ti to be built and hence requires additional development effort, and it’s buggy too.

Incentivized

Jira and Confluence are widely implemented in organizations of various industries so incorporating Zephyr Scale is a very seamless method of adding scalable testing management. Testing visibility and end to end traceability is possible and integrates in Jira. Developers and engineers are able to take advantage of the built-in reports and statistics and even automate testing. The value is greatly reduced for organizations that do not already implement Jira and Confluence as the native integrated compatibility is much of the value

Incentivized

• Scriptless and hence coding is easy.
• Maintenance of the scripts are easy.
• Learning curve is small.

Incentivized

• Scalable and compatible with Jira & Confluence
• Improves testing visibility, data analysis, collaboration with reports & gadgets
• Easy to retrospectively trace testing with change history

Incentivized

• The tool is not developer friendly and hence adoption across developers is low.
• The tool does not have an admin console to manage the users centrally.
• Different types of licensing and it’s all user based and hence pricey.

Incentivized

• Not as valuable if not already using Jira or Confluence
• Can be overlooked if the user does not set automation
• Needs better first time tutorials

Incentivized

When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.

Incentivized

Zephyr scale is easier to work with and more seamlessly used because it is natively integrated with Jira and Confluence. TestRail cannot provide the same scalable experience and is rather dated and limited in capability. Developers rather use tools that are compatible with each other, and Zephyr scale offers that

Incentivized

• Overall adoption of an automation tool went up.
• Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort.
• Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult.
• Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded.

Incentivized

• Dozens of added testing capability via integrated gadgets
• Reduced testing and tracking time
• Faster and clearer testing operations awareness

Incentivized