We performed a comparison between Parasoft Development Testing Platform and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."The most valuable feature is code coverage."
"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams."
"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."
"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..."
"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."
"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 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."
"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."
"The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well."
"Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."
"The solution's speed has room for improvement."
"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."
"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."
"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."
"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."
"I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that."
"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."
"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."
Parasoft Development Testing Platform is ranked 18th in Test Management Tools with 4 reviews while Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. Parasoft Development Testing Platform is rated 8.6, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Parasoft Development Testing Platform writes "Provides 100 percent code coverage, is stable, and scalable". On the other hand, 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". Parasoft Development Testing Platform is most compared with Codebeamer, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS.
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.
