codeBeamer ALM vs. PractiTest

In my opinion codeBeamer is well suited for any activity where detailed tracking is needed with teams involved. It can be less suited for small projects which do not last long, or are not continuous, etc

PractiTest works GREAT as a test case repository. It is very easy to gather metrics, filter, and sort based on custom fields. We were able to work with the API to pull our automation results in as well. The support team is always very quick with their responses and monitors the "in-app chat." They are very open to answering questions, providing best practice materials, and looking for additional feedback. If you already have a central location for all of your test cases and testing needs, then I guess you probably wouldn't need to add another. However, PractiTest has high capability and potential, so if it's set up properly you can easily save time managing your tests.

Incentivized

• Tracing of requirements.
• Tracking of development.
• Tracking of QA.
• Tracking of bugs.
• Tracking of releases.
• Wiki.
• Users and teams.
• Works for teams scattered across the globe.
• Testing and coverage for releases.
• Integration with SVN.

• Effective Test case template.
• Can integrate with different Atlassian products.
• Report generation.

Incentivized

• Search.
• Metric calculation.
• Would be nice that cB is a source of truth, i.e., that say SVN commit is done only from cB; know this is difficult to achieve.

• Linking the defect with Jira throws an error quite some times which can be improved in the future.

Incentivized

Sometimes info in codeBeamer can be lost, in principle, if not well organized by the user, info can never be found, or can be forgotten about, etc

Excellent support professionally. Also, thanks for giving me for free access to SaaS cB for my hobbyist project.

The chat button is available to anyone who logs into PractiTest. In my experience, the support has always been very quick, very friendly, and very thorough. They make sure that your question is answered in a way that you understand it. They also provide documentation of best practices so you are never left hanging on what to do next.

Incentivized

codeBeamer is by far better.

I've used many different Test Case Repository tools, and while each of them has its perks, I like the capabilities of PractiTest best. When creating a test in qTest for example, you can only input information into the fields provided, and you have everything set up in a folder tree structure. With PractiTest, we are able to create custom fields and filter our tests based on those fields to provide more accurate information in a readily available format while quickly searching for the filter instead of through a folder tree. TestRail did not appear to meet our needs as a company. It just didn't have the potential that we found with PractiTest. Zephyr for example worked seamlessly with Jira, which is really nice since that is what we use for the most part. However since we cater to many different clients, we needed an external Test Case repository so we could use something that wasn't tied to 1 Jira instance.

Incentivized

• Customer tracking.
• Process tracking.
• Workflow framework.
• Can be overhead.

• Test Reporting
• Defect Management

Incentivized