We performed a comparison between Tricentis qTest and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."
"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."
"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."
"The JIRA integration is really important to us because it allows our business analysts to see test results inside the JIRA ticket and that we have met the definition of "done," and have made sure we tested to the requirements of the story."
"I like the way it structures a project... We're able to put the test cases into qTest or modify something that's already there, so it's a reusable-type of environment. It is very important that we can do that and change our test data as needed..."
"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."
"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."
"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."
"Visual Studio is an exemplary integrated development environment that stands out due to its exceptional features. It allows for the seamless selection of the appropriate programming language for the specific development tasks at hand. This facilitates a swift and effortless transition between languages, providing a highly efficient development experience."
"It is a very common and strong product. A lot of support is available for this product."
"The product is good to create big or small projects fastly. It is one of the leaders in the area."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"I was satisfied with the support given by customer service."
"The solution is easy to use and they have also integrated with Microsoft."
"The solution is very stable."
"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."
"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."
"The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved."
"We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features. The JIRA integration with qTest needs to mature a lot... We need smarter execution with JIRA in the case of failures, so that the way we pull out the issues again for the next round is easy... Locating JIRA defects corresponding to a trait from the test results is something of a challenge."
"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."
"The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique."
"I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use. ALM's... Defects Module is really robust. You can actually walk through each defect by just clicking an arrow... But with the qTest Defects module you can't do that. You have to run a query. You're pretty much just querying a database. It's not really a module, or at least a robust module. Everything is very manual."
"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."
"Its UI could be better."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its stability."
"The product must provide more automation."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"The performance could be faster."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"The solution's documentation could be improved for beginners."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 48 reviews. Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Tricentis qTest writes "Puts all our test cases in one location where everyone can see them. qTest also allows the segregation of different types of Testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and Katalon Studio. See our Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
