Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs UiPath Test Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Adaptavist Test Management ...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
UiPath Test Cloud
Ranking in Test Management Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (5th), Mobile App Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 2.9%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
UiPath Test Cloud2.9%
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.5%
Other94.6%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.
SK
Senior Solutions Architect at a outsourcing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Integrates well and supports end-to-end workflows with API integration
I deal with various tools including UiPath Test Cloud, Sauce Labs, Postman, and the latest feature, Copilot, so I use everything. A lot of tools are involved. There is a significant difference between Sauce Labs and UiPath Test Cloud; while Sauce Labs offers automation capabilities, the differentiating factor is test coverage. UiPath Test Cloud hits a higher percentage of test cases per lines of code, which means it may cover 7,000 lines in automated tests from 10,000, as opposed to 3,000-4,000 lines with Sauce Labs in a similar scenario. Sauce Labs is less expensive than some of the other tools, and while UiPath Test Cloud has become much better and easier to use than in the past, Sauce Labs was initially user-friendly, but now UiPath Test Cloud has improved significantly from its earlier, more complicated interface.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"It's useful for automating tasks."
"The most valuable feature of UiPath Test Cloud that I have found is the TestManager dashboard, which integrates with Jira through Planview Tasktop. This allows us to create different suites in TestManager, schedule them, and integrate them with CI/CD."
"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."
"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."
"It is a very scalable product."
"We can generate our own workflow. In our case, it is a report on the PDF file. In the reporting category, we generally verify a couple of things and generate a lot of reports at the end of the day. It provides some useful details about the data captured from the PDF that we can put into an Excel file."
 

Cons

"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"The speed could be improved. I've noticed that adding more users impacts the speed, although nothing stops entirely."
"It would be very beneficial to do load testing with Test Suite."
"I don't rate its ability to automate very well."
"There is room for improvement in terms of introducing framework compatibility. Many companies use test automation as an alternative to Selenium but need to develop a fully functional bot in UiPath to test on it, which is inefficient."
"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"The product releases sometimes have issues."
"Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"I don't necessarily have a problem with the pricing of the UiPath Test Suite, especially because we're using the testing bot licenses as opposed to the unattended licensing."
"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."
"The cost of a UiPath Test Suite license for five users is over $10,000 USD."
"I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced per year."
"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."
"Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects."
"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."
"Its price is a bit high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
22%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
7%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slig...
What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manua...
What do you like most about UiPath Test Suite?
Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?
I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced p...
What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?
The speed could be improved. I've noticed that adding more users impacts the speed, although nothing stops entirely. The speed for each transaction might be slower, but I cannot pinpoint exactly wh...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Test Suite
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.