PractiTest vs. TestRail

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

The integration with other tools, and their user friendly layout and design. It's very comfortable to use and is way better than other tools with the Automation Testing tools, thanks to the great API that is included. Sometimes the integration with Jira is a little faulty, but the links to that tool usually work well. It could be cool if it had a better following for the bug items that were registered on other tools.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• Beautiful and productive UI.
• Nice filtering system allowing me to find what I need quickly.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• Integration with Jira seems [a] little faulty.
• Increase the API call limit for different editions.
• Better way to trigger automation suites from TestRail.

Incentivized

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

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

TestRail definitely saves times. I work in a company that consists of several development teams, all of which have different processes. Some of the teams leverage test cases, some do not. I've noticed that the turn around time it takes for me to pick up a ticket, QA it, and then pass/fail/send feedback is much faster when there is a test case created as I'm not reading through ticket description/comments to figure out what needs to be QA'd.

Incentivized

• Test Reporting
• Defect Management

Incentivized

• Improved test management process and collaboration inside team.
• Increased transparency of QA work.
• Team became more satisfied.

Incentivized