TrustRadius Insights
Users have found Tricentis qTest to be a useful tool for managing tests, encompassing tasks such as creating, executing, and updating …
Starting at $1,200 per year per user
View PricingOverview
What is Tricentis qTest?
Tricentis qTest (formerly QASymphony) provides enterprise-level agile testing tools giving businesses visibility and control needed to ensure application quality in fast-paced development environments. Tricentis and QASymphony merged in summer 2018.
Recent Reviews
How Tricentis qTest Differs From Its Competitors
Awards
Products that are considered exceptional by their customers based on a variety of criteria win TrustRadius awards. Learn more about the types of TrustRadius awards to make the best purchase decision. More about TrustRadius Awards
Popular Features
- Centralized test management (25)8.888%
- Test execution reporting (25)8.585%
- Defect management (21)7.777%
- Manage test hosts and schedules (22)7.777%
Reviewer Pros & Cons
Principal Consultant
Infosys Limited (Information Technology & Services, 10,001+ employees)
Pricing
Entry-level set up fee?
- Setup fee optional
For the latest information on pricing, visithttps://www.tricentis.com/products/unif…
Offerings
- Free Trial
- Free/Freemium Version
- Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Starting price (does not include set up fee)
- $1,200 per year per user
Product Demos
qTest: Project Field Settings
YouTube
Features
Return to navigation
Product Details
- About
- Integrations
- Competitors
- Tech Details
- Downloadables
- FAQs
What is Tricentis qTest?
Tricentis qTest is a scalable test management solution that integrates with planning, testing, and DevOps tools, like Jira, Selenium, and Jenkins, giving teams a complete, unified view of testing throughout the software development cycle. It supports Agile, waterfall, or any hybrid methodology, allowing QA and development teams to approach testing strategically and collaboratively, and  to release higher quality software faster.
Tricentis qTest Features
Test Management Features
- Supported: Centralized test management
- Supported: Manage test hosts and schedules
- Supported: Test execution reporting
- Supported: Defect management
Additional Features
- Supported: Jira integration: Event-driven sync with Agile planning tools for up-to-date traceability
Tricentis qTest Screenshots
Tricentis qTest Videos
Tricentis qTest Integrations
- Jira Software
- Jenkins
- Selenium
- Bamboo
- GitHub
- Tricentis Tosca
- Tricentis NeoLoad
- TestNG
- JUnit
- Azure Pipelines
- Azure Boards
- Tricentis Vera
Tricentis qTest Competitors
Tricentis qTest Technical Details
| Deployment Types | On-premise, Software as a Service (SaaS), Cloud, or Web-Based |
|---|---|
| Operating Systems | Windows, Linux |
| Mobile Application | No |
| Supported Countries | Global |
| Supported Languages | English |
Tricentis qTest Downloadables
- Tricentis qTest: Unified test management and orchestration
- Tricentis qTest Manager + Jira Software
- qTest Launch: Test Automation Management
- qTest Insights: Robust Analytics and Reporting for Agile Dev Testing
- qTest Explorer: Exploratory Testing for Agile Teams
- qTest Scenario: Enterprise BDD for Jira Software
Frequently Asked Questions
Tricentis qTest (formerly QASymphony) provides enterprise-level agile testing tools giving businesses visibility and control needed to ensure application quality in fast-paced development environments. Tricentis and QASymphony merged in summer 2018.
Tricentis qTest starts at $1200.
OpenText ALM/Quality Center, QMetry Test Management, and Zephyr Enterprise are common alternatives for Tricentis qTest.
Reviewers rate Centralized test management highest, with a score of 8.8.
The most common users of Tricentis qTest are from Enterprises (1,001+ employees).
Comparisons
Compare with
Reviews and Ratings
(51)
Community Insights
TrustRadius Insights are summaries of user sentiment data from TrustRadius reviews and, when necessary, 3rd-party data sources. Have feedback on this content? Let us know!
- Business Problems Solved
- Pros
- Cons
Users have found Tricentis qTest to be a useful tool for managing tests, encompassing tasks such as creating, executing, and updating manual and automation test cases. The platform integrates smoothly with JIRA for defect tracking and reporting, fostering collaboration and the sharing of test results with stakeholders. Supporting end-to-end test case management in both manual and automated scenarios, it enables the facilitation of test suite triggers and BDD tests.
Users appreciate being able to link test cases to automation cases for parallel execution, along with its integration with tools like ADO board for real-time defect and story tracking. Tricentis qTest acts as a central hub for managing test cases, monitoring test execution status, and ensuring compliance and quality throughout the software development lifecycle.
Field Customization: Users have consistently praised the tool for its intuitive field configuration and customization options, which streamline the process of mapping out complex business workflows effectively. The user-friendly interface for customizing fields has been highlighted as a key feature that enhances overall usability.
Cloud Compatibility: Many reviewers have expressed satisfaction with the tool's seamless integration with cloud-based solutions, noting how this capability significantly improves accessibility and flexibility in test management tasks. The ability to leverage cloud resources has been lauded for enhancing collaboration among team members working on testing projects.
Efficient Test Case Management: Customers appreciate the tool's robust functionalities in creating, editing, and organizing test cases efficiently. Its smooth integration with popular platforms like Jira and Selenium for automated script execution has garnered positive feedback from users seeking comprehensive test case management solutions.
Struggles with defect searching: Some users have found it challenging to efficiently search for defects within the software, indicating a lack of ease in locating and managing reported issues effectively. This difficulty can lead to delays in addressing critical issues and may impact overall project timelines and quality control processes.
Integration limitations: Several users have expressed a desire for more extensive integration capabilities with other systems, such as SAP. They noted difficulties in seamlessly integrating qTest with third-party automation tools, impacting overall workflow efficiency and potentially hindering cross-functional collaboration.
Complexity of the user interface: Users have pointed out the intricate nature of the Tricentis qTest interface, particularly emphasizing challenges faced when navigating and utilizing it for mobile application testing. The complexity of the UI can result in decreased productivity and user satisfaction, requiring additional training or resources to overcome usability hurdles.
Attribute Ratings
Reviews
(1-1 of 1)Companies can't remove reviews or game the system. Here's why
February 21, 2022
Current (soon-to-be former) qTest User and Administrator
qTest is our test case repository. We have a 2-way integration with Jira, which we use as our defect and requirements management software. We also use the Sessions module of qTest as our evidence collection tool. Finally, we report on test execution and test coverage from qTest to submit as a deliverable to our internal audit team.
- The organization aspects of qTest are very good.
- When Sessions does not interrupt testing by bogging down system resources, it is helpful.
- Parameters is a great module that we have not taken full advantage of.
- Customer support has been abysmal since Tricentis took over qTest.
- Over time, it feels like the app is getting worse and worse from a performance, reporting, and integration perspective.
- Returning to support, a user should not have to write an email to support learning how to file a ticket on the support portal. The support portal could be MUCH more user-friendly.
- Locating CURRENT documentation for qTest is difficult. Once it is found, the documentation is confusing and often redirects to broken links. Recently, for example, there was verbiage that seemed to indicate that qTest was end-of-life. When I attempted to get clarification on this, Support sent me a link to the document that cause the confusion in the first place.
- When we signed on to qTest, we had a dedicated relationship manager. That lasted until shortly after the Tricentis takeover. This was very important to me as I am a high-touch client.
30%
3.0
- The best value-add qTest has provided my team is Sessions. It has sped up our evidence collection vastly. The problem here is that Sessions can also be a system resource hog and slow testing down. So it can be a wash overall.
Jira configuration is fairly straightforward. We did have an ongoing Webhook issue (which I got ZERO support on) when attempting to connect to a unique Jira instance. This never got solved and we eventually gave up on the integration. Selenium is integrated via the command line and our automation lead got zero support on this integration. In order to finalize the integration, she worked with a support community outside of Tricentis. Browser Stack integration went smoothly.
I wish I could say that qTest improved visibility into our coverage, but the reporting aspects of qTest have changed so often and so drastically over our time using it that we have never really gotten a strong feeling for how much this visibility has increased. What's more, our internal audit team found it aggravating and confusing that my deliverables to them were frequently changing.
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.
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.
20
Software testing and internal auditing.
3
I and two individuals on our Help Desk support the software.
- Requirements coverage and traceability
- Evidence collection
- Reporting
- n/a
- n/a. We will not be utilizing qTest after our current contract expires.
Yes
We replaced Xray. At the time, QASymphony owned qTest and was the reason we chose the tool. QASymphony was exceptional at its support and implementation assistance. As soon as Tricentis absorbed qTest, all of that disappeared and the application has seemingly gotten progressively worse and its support has gone to essentially nil.
Support was the most important factor.
I would have gone with any other tool.
- Implemented in-house
No
Change management was a minor issue with the implementation
Documentation for implementation was middling. In order to satisfy our change management needs, internal documentation creation was necessary.
- Documentation
This was never offered to me, but based on the abysmal level of support I got, I wouldn't have upgraded it anyway.
Yes
No. I raised an issue multiple times and was only referred back to a support document that provided steps that I had already attempted.
No, I cannot.
- Test case organization is nice
- Test creation and execution are intuitive and straightforward
- Integration with test automation
Yes, but I don't use it