Octopus Deploy vs. Tricentis qTest

Octopus Deploy is a well though [the] solution to the deployment orchestration problem. It is a reliable and robust solution that is relatively simple to understand. [Its] UI is friendly and easy to use, The support and documentation [are] excellent and the product seems to fit into any organization’s process very well and with less effort than other products in this space. I actually find it a pleasure to work with [every day] and I am glad to have it as an integral part of our process.

Incentivized

Best Case Scenario 1. Large-Scale Enterprise Testing Example: qTest’s requirement traceability and audit trails ensured compliance with strict regulatory standards 2. Agile/DevOps Teams with Jira Example:In a CI/CD pipeline, qTest’s Jira sync automated defect logging. Developers fixed bugs faster because tickets included linked test steps and screenshots. 3. Manual Regression Testing Example: Versioned test cases and bulk editing streamline repetitive workflows. Less Appropriate Scenarios 1. Small Teams with Simple Projects Example: Heavyweight for lightweight needs 2. Mobile-First Testing Example: Lacks native mobile testing features (e.g., real-device support).

Incentivized

• Octopus integrates nicely with TeamCity, our build server.
• Octopus uses the same deployment packages across environments and makes it easy to track their progress across those environments.
• Octopus makes it easy to handle configuration across environments which is usually a particularly difficult task.

Incentivized

• Highly customizable: we were able to organize our test cases in unique ways that made our work easier.
• Connectivity with Jira: being able to pull requirements information in from Jira was a big point for us.
• Standalone tool: Being a standalone tool on a dedicated server, we were able to have access to our tests regardless of whether our Jira server was down.

Incentivized

• UI is very fluffy and padded. It looks pretty but it could benefit from a more compact, information-focused design
• Deployment process options are not always laid out in an intuitive manner. Choosing which steps to exclude, which environments or targets to deploy to, etc., is not immediately clear
• Lack of useful reports and metrics for tracking active deployments and historical data

Incentivized

• In requirements , we can't add multiple test cases at once, or search multiple cases at once, need to do one by one. Here actually qtest needs to improve.
• Linking cloud hosted qtest and on-premise TOSCA is very difficult especially when you are working with client system with security wall. It requires tunnelling software which is not recommended.

Incentivized

Would be a 10 except for the retirement of the free Community Edition.

Incentivized

This has been a core QA management tool for our organization and integrates well with our other SDLC platforms (Azure DevOps/Jira/Katalon).

Incentivized

Octopus Deploy has greatly helped us to improve our reliability and frequency of our deployments and given us the confidence to deploy much more often, with a direct benefit to customers. Cross-platform support and release to Cloud require more focus on the product side.

Incentivized

qTest is actually intuitive and user-friendly, despite my other scathing review aspects

Incentivized

Octopus Deploy is a software that runs very effectively, is easy to use, does not require such a high learning curve, provides the necessary tools to carry out the functions it offers, making it a very flexible software, it also allows that can be configured according to the needs of the user and provides integrations with other very advantageous tools since they are carried out in a very favorable way.

Incentivized

Octopus Deploy support has always been there for us, even when using the free tier, we get responsive hands-on help. We haven't needed to use that level of support since the documentation is clearly written, and help is readily available within the interface itself. Using Octopus Deploy is a truly joyful experience.

Incentivized

The actual answer is 0. I have never experienced worse support, whether personal or professional

Incentivized

Again, supporting documentation could have been a lot better

Incentivized

There aren't really any competitors in the land of ASP.NET. Deployment is too ad-hoc. Other tools exist that have massive downsides, like Web Deploy. Most aren't even supported anymore. You could argue that containers (Docker) are a competitor, but containers cannot be used for everything and solve a somewhat different problem. Octopus Deploy is even able to help with containers. To us, Octopus Deploy was really the only really polished solution.

Incentivized

All of them offer formidable solutions in the test management realm, but each one caters to different niche and need. qTest distinguishes itself with its deep integration capabilities, especially with Agile and DevOps tools, enabling streamlined CI/CD process. Its modern, user-centric interface contrasts with ALM's more dated appearance and complex setup. While TestRail provides a clean user experience and caters to a broad spectrum of business, qTest's scalability, from SMBs to large enterprises, stands out. PractiTest's cloud-based solution is geared towards mid-sized companies, but qTest's flexibility, advanced analytics, and robust reporting grant teams actionable insights. qTest' approach to a more holistic test management closely aligning with modern software development practices

Incentivized

Great support from professional services.

Incentivized

• While not an inexpensive product, it has proven to be a good value. I don't have firm ROI numbers but our PROD deployment quality has improved, and we now measure deployment times in "person-minutes" rather than "person-hours".
• Our defect rate due to missed configuration items has been significantly reduced.
• Octopus has enhanced our ability to enforce SDLC separation-of-duties.

Incentivized

• Better organization and centralization of test cases has led to more cohesive team collaboration
• Speed to delivery, deployments to production, are mostly maintained
• Performance issues have led to testing delays requiring the team to switch to other methods which contributed to QA bottleneck issues and sometimes even missed sprint commitments

Incentivized