Inflectra SpiraTest vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Inflectra and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Inflectra is ranked #23, while Tricentis is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.3. Inflectra holds a 1.1% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 15.1% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of Inflectra users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Inflectra SpiraTest

Read 25 Inflectra SpiraTest reviews

478 Views
148 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 18 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,871 Views
1,328 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Inflectra SpiraTest

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Inflectra SpiraTest and Tricentis qTest are both viable options for test management. Tricentis qTest takes the upper hand with its advanced features and comprehensive support, making it a more worthwhile investment for users.

Features: Inflectra SpiraTest offers robust test case management, requirements management, and defect tracking capabilities. Tricentis qTest provides comprehensive analytics, automation support, and integration with various DevOps tools. Users indicate that Tricentis qTest offers a more extensive feature set.

Room for Improvement: Inflectra SpiraTest users suggest enhancements in reporting capabilities and better integration options. Tricentis qTest users highlight the need for improvements in performance speed and occasional issues with stability. Both products face specific areas to refine, but Tricentis qTest faces more substantial performance concerns.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Inflectra SpiraTest is commended for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. Tricentis qTest offers a smooth deployment but receives higher praise for comprehensive support and thorough onboarding. Both products are easy to deploy, but Tricentis qTest provides a superior customer service experience.

Pricing and ROI: Inflectra SpiraTest is seen as cost-effective with a favorable ROI, appealing to budget-conscious users. Tricentis qTest, despite its higher cost, delivers a better ROI due to its advanced features and capabilities. Users find that the investment in Tricentis qTest is justified by its feature-rich offerings and long-term benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

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

Inflectra SpiraTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

23rd

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Requirements Management (11th)

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Inflectra SpiraTest is 1.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 15.1%, up from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Jason Lopez

Test Manager at a engineering company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Intuitive enough and easy to learn, but in terms of folder organization, it could be better

Inflectra SpiraTest is the new kid on the block compared to Jira and Azure. Still, when I started exploring the tool, I realized that it was no different from other tools I've used in the past, but it all boils down to adaptability because the features would always be more or less the same. I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it.

Read full review

SamuLehikoinen

Partner Manager at Agiilit Oy

Efficient and collaborative software testing providing comprehensive test management capabilities, seamless integration with various tools and impressive manual regression testing features

The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall experience with the tool was positive. When you begin integrating your testing tools with qTest, the available examples may not be very clear, and I believe this is an area that could be enhanced, particularly in terms of providing clearer integration guidance. While the tool's integration with various testing tools is impressive, there is room for improvement in showcasing more cases and benefits, especially through additional videos and documentation.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."

"Inflectra SpiraTest has a lot of functionality, which is good."

"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."

"The features of this product most valuable to me were the test case management and the visual status, by which it was displayed."

"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."

"We were able to add a step-by-step procedure for someone to follow to assist in testing."

"I found Inflectra SpiraTest intuitive enough. It's also easy to learn, so this is what I like about it."

"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."

"Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

"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 test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

"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..."

"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."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"Being able to add scripting for testing can and does save a lot of time. When you are able to just ‘run’ a test case rather than manually add it and run it."

"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."

"Two areas that can stand improvement: integration with third party products and making it more intuitive."

"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."

"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."

"The user interface is slightly complicated and not very consistent. It could be more user friendly."

"The folder organization in Inflectra SpiraTest could be better, though I cannot comment whether that is structure-related. Most of what I need would probably be in the tool, but as a test manager, I need to be able to create dashboards and reports easily."

"We faced challenges when trying to consolidate data in a repository, and similar features were lacking in qTest. It also does not allow for task tracking or calculating time spent on tasks, which affects project timelines."

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

"The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved."

"For UFT to Tosca migration, scripts need to be rewritten as there are no automatic converters available."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I Googled the pricing for Inflectra SpiraTest, and it's about $4,000 annually."

"The pricing was excellent. I would recommend the enterprise solution."

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

13%

Marketing Services Firm

Performing Arts

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

The solution is expensive. For the features that are available, depending on the volumes of licenses we get, we are able to get better discounts as strategic partners of Tosca. We can pass some ben...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Customers are moving towards Tricentis due to their association with SAP. There is interest in understanding if there are connectors for converting UFT scripts to Tosca, as many customers are looki...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jira vs Inflectra SpiraTest

Compared 100% of the time

More Inflectra SpiraTest Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 33% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 24% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTest

August 2025

Download Inflectra SpiraTest product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

July 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

SpiraTest, Spira

qTest

Overview

SpiraTest is an integrated Requirements and Quality Management solution that manages your project's Requirements, Test Cases, Releases, Defects and Issues in one environment, with complete traceability throughout. After defining your project's requirements, you generate the test cases and test steps that validate the functionality. The test execution modules allows users to run through the tests, logging defects/issues as they go. SpiraTest is Fully Web-Based. Free 30-Day Trial.

Inflectra

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

- Morningstar - Deutsch Bank - Sopra Group - Booz Allen & Hamilton - UBS - US Government

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest

July 2025

Free Report: Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Inflectra SpiraTest vs. Tricentis qTest 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.