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
Tricentis qTest
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
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.
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 …
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.
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, …
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 …
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, …
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 …
- 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.
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 …
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.
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.
Quality Assurance Manager - Application Development & Support
Chose Tricentis qTest
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 …
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 …
For most of the test case scenarios, PractiTest works fine. If we talk about one specific feature then it would be the automation side. I like this feature a lot just because it made all testing so easy and effortless but on the other hand automation in this platform comes with so many limitations and that's where I am not fully satisfied.
Tricentis qTest integrates seamlessly with Jira, making it ideal for teams that manage user stories and defects in Jira while keeping test cases and execution in qTest. When paired with automation tools like tosca, Selenium, or WebdriverIO, qTest is excellent for aggregating both manual and automated test results in one place.
As a fresher, when I started using qTest it was very handy and easy to understand.
It helps us trace the test cases that are used to test the quality in a single location
The main thing is its integration with JIRA as soon as we create a ticket we would be getting all the requirements in the qTest so it became easy for me
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.
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.
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