PractiTest vs. Tuskr

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
PractiTest
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
PractiTest is presented as a cloud-based test management tool that provides its customers with an end-to-end system to meet testing and QA needs. It is described by the vendor as flexible but methodological, enabling organizations to ensure visibility and communication at all levels. The solution aims to help users and project development teams streamline and manage their testing processes, while providing management with a clear and simple view of their project status at all times.
$39
user
Tuskr
Score 9.7 out of 10
N/A
Tuskr is a cloud-based test management software. Users can manage test cases, conduct test runs and integrate with bug and time tracking tools. Tuskr is available via a free plan, and with a 30-day free trial of paid tier features.
$45
per month 5 users (minimum)
Pricing
PractiTestTuskr
Editions & Modules
Professional
$39.00
user
Enterprise
$49.00
user
Team
$9
per month per user
Business
$15
per month per user
Enterprise
$29
per month per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
PractiTestTuskr
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional Details—16% discount for annual pricing.
More Pricing Information
Features
PractiTestTuskr
Test Management
Comparison of Test Management features of Product A and Product B
PractiTest
8.5
4 Ratings
6% above category average
Tuskr
9.7
20 Ratings
19% above category average
Centralized test management9.24 Ratings9.819 Ratings
Map tests to user stories8.44 Ratings00 Ratings
Test execution reporting8.44 Ratings9.720 Ratings
Defect management8.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
PractiTestTuskr
Small Businesses
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
Enterprises
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 7.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
PractiTestTuskr
Likelihood to Recommend
8.7
(4 ratings)
9.9
(21 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
PractiTestTuskr
Likelihood to Recommend
PractiTest
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.
Read full review
Celoxis
Customizing fields and sorting make test case management easy to handle. The TCM's swift menu adjustments and dynamic graphs enhance the user experience, making it a delight to use.Few points which I do not dislike as such but can be improved. One is the ability to write longer tests. Another thing is that the UI when it comes to modifications like adding a new field, editing a field, etc requires few clicks and the path is slightly ambiguous.
Read full review
Pros
PractiTest
  • Effective Test case template.
  • Can integrate with different Atlassian products.
  • Report generation.
Read full review
Celoxis
  • Its easy to import test cases in Tuskr by using the csv import feature
  • Test runs are easy to create and can include test cases from multiple suits.
  • Reports of test runs make it easier to track all the cases that were covered at a particular instance before giving a release signoff.
Read full review
Cons
PractiTest
  • Linking the defect with Jira throws an error quite some times which can be improved in the future.
Read full review
Celoxis
  • When you click into a specific test, the status automatically clears. it would be nice for this to be preserved when clicking in instead of clearing
  • It would be nice to be able to add comments specific to certain steps in each test, instead of just one big comment box
  • Since we use Tuskr for QA, we structure it as a table with instructions and expected results. because these are side by side, sometimes it is hard to go in a step-by-step order when there are multiple QA steps to take to complete the test.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
PractiTest
No answers on this topic
Celoxis
Tuskr suits our organization needs
Read full review
Support Rating
PractiTest
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.
Read full review
Celoxis
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
PractiTest
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.
Read full review
Celoxis
I have not worked with related testing suite before but Tuskr has been the favorite platform for running test suites. It has generated positive leads from the company data by offering the necessary testing support. It is easy to integrate with other applications to suit business demands. The system generate results from various testing suites that can shared with our clients.
Read full review
Return on Investment
PractiTest
  • Test Reporting
  • Defect Management
Read full review
Celoxis
  • Make the process to create tests a lot smoother, so increase production value by reducing bugs released to customers.
  • Learning curves hinders some progress at the beginning.
  • Pricing is great for a small team, worth it with 30 days trial as well.
Read full review
ScreenShots

PractiTest Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of

Tuskr Screenshots

Screenshot of Progress MonitoringScreenshot of Create Flexible test casesScreenshot of Distribute Workload