Tricentis qTest

Formerly QASymphony

As I am not the actual decision maker of which tool to purchase. I have always liked the Tricentis qTest tool. Decision has been made by the top management, The tool has proven is value and for the Same reason it is still being used.

Open option for automation testing & easy to set up.

Still evaluating. TestRail seems to be a far better solution but we need to solve migration issues.

looking at the positive features like 3rd party integration, the Tricentis qTest stacks up along with providing the custom build and event driven workflows with open-source solutions (Azure, DevOps, Teams etc). Manages and schedule automated testing along with creating report and providing detailed description on defects and test status. The dashboard can be customized to report release,program etc.

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.

Extensive integration options with various third-party tools, enabling seamless integration into existing workflows.
Allows for flexibility and customization of workflows, fields, and permissions to adapt to unique testing requirements.
Supports robust requirements traceability, ensuring comprehensive test coverage.
Lastly management decisions too

Tricentis is easy to use and user friendly. Less time consuming with lot of good utilities. And for better test management. qTest also stacks up better than the above tools due to its efficiency, test case interface and test execution interface. Excellent comments area and integration with Jira for defect management.

- It was not our decision to use qTest as a tool, as this was a management decision.
- Since I have used many Test Management Tools I can compare for e.g
The Reporting and Statistics in qTest is very impressive.
Integration with other tools is a plus
we can integrate it with Automation tool

Tricentis qtest is well suited as it serves the purpose for both quality assurance and business management. It is very simple for non technical users to write test cases in free hand and they don’t have to bother about traceability as it is automatically handled by this application. The best part for this above other tool is ease of writing.

I have worked on Jira, but i found it more difficult interface to handle. It was not user friendly. The defect management was also not impressive. qTest experience actually helped me to take decision while evaluating.

I'm not the decision maker, so I can't provide objective comparison criteria, but I can say that Tricentis QTest is a reliable tool for Test Management.

Tricentis was better suited to our processes, tools integration and migration of data from our prior tool set.

Didn’t have the same ease of use for us and didn’t integrate as well into our test process.

Tricentis qTest provides a neater package, with easier test execution and better integration with our other tools.

Prior to qTest, the teams were using TestLink.

The main tool we compared to Tricentis qTest Explorer was the "Steps Recorder" that comes with Windows. We selected Tricentis qTest Explorer because, at least at the time, Steps Recorder would sometimes skip recording arbitrary steps, which didn't meet our needs.

None of our previous tools we listed in the available drop-down options. We had previously used Spira Test and Xray as our test repositories. We are currently evaluating Test Rail, Zephyr, PractiTest, and others.

From an organizational perspective, qTest is better than Xray as Xray had no organization when we used it. Spria Test was clunky and antiquated when we used it, so qTest felt more modern by comparison.

We felt like for the feature set and due to the fact it was mid-range on the cost, it was a good choice. It also has some other plugins which we plan to utilize at some point like Tosca.

We selected QASymphony because even though all the testing software are Agile compatible test management tools that offer complete coverage of the whole process of quality control: requirements, testing and management of test cases, problem management and reports. It offers hosting in the cloud and server (internal) for your software, QASymphony allows us to customize each part of the workflow. It offers exclusive hierarchical filters that allow defining parameters for test cases and sets of tests, avoiding duplicate errors and, in general, offering an intelligent way to easily manage all project information.