Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Parasoft and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Parasoft is ranked #29, while Tricentis is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.3. Parasoft holds a 1.3% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 14.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Parasoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Parasoft Development Testin...

Read 4 Parasoft Development Testing Platform reviews

473 Views
109 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 18 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,791 Views
1,290 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Parasoft Development Testin...

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Parasoft Development Testing Platform and Tricentis qTest are both robust tools in the software testing category. Users appear more satisfied with Tricentis qTest due to its feature set and ease of deployment, while Parasoft gains favor for its support and pricing.

Features: Parasoft Development Testing Platform provides in-depth code analysis, compliance with industry standards, and comprehensive test coverage reports. Tricentis qTest offers integration with agile and DevOps workflows, flexible test management capabilities, and a range of features adaptable to modern software development practices.

Room for Improvement: Parasoft Development Testing Platform needs better documentation, a more streamlined setup process, and enhancements in user interface design. Tricentis qTest could improve its reporting functionalities, customer support speed, and the learning curve for new users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft Development Testing Platform is recognized for smooth deployment but has mixed reviews regarding customer service. Tricentis qTest is praised for quick and easy deployment within agile environments and has higher satisfaction in customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Users appreciate the competitive pricing and perceived value of Parasoft Development Testing Platform, though some see it as requiring a larger initial investment. Tricentis qTest, while potentially higher in cost, is viewed as delivering better ROI due to its extensive features and alignment with agile methodologies.

To learn more, read our detailed Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Tricentis qTest

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,566 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

Parasoft Development Testin...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

29th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (20th), Application Requirements Management (16th)

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 October 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Parasoft Development Testing Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 14.4%, up from 13.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tricentis qTest	14.4%
Parasoft Development Testing Platform	1.3%
Other	84.3%

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Ujjwal Gupta

Project Lead at Mphasis

A complete test management tool that facilitates developers' unit testing

Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time. This would reduce the execution time, helping achieve goals on time, and with less effort required. I use the different licenses to manage this issue and it can be controlled by different users for functional testing.

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 most valuable feature is code coverage."

"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams."

"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."

"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 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."

"The initial setup was very easy."

"The self-healing aspects and maintenance of scripts are much faster and quicker, and we are able to find better avenues and better productivity in terms of maintenance, which we can pass on to the customer."

"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."

"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."

"The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"The solution's speed has room for improvement."

"Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Costly."

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

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

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	13

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

PractiTest vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform

Compared 54% of the time

Jira vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform

Compared 46% of the time

More Parasoft Development Testing Platform Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 33% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 25% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 7% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

September 2025

Parasoft Development Testing Platform report

Download Parasoft Development Testing Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

September 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP

qTest

Overview

Parasoft DTP aggregates the results from across testing practices, providing intelligent and continuous monitoring of the testing outcomes for greater visibility into what is working — and what isn’t. Includes:

- Comprehensive Reports & Dashboards

- Preconfigured compliance reporting

- Customized Advanced Analytics

- Interactive Navigation of Results

- Traceability

Parasoft

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

General Motors, Lockheed Martin, Qualcomm, AAI Textron, Boeing, Fidelity, Johnson & Johnson, CIBC, Penske, Thales, Dell,

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

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Tricentis qTest

September 2025

Free Report: Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Parasoft Development Testing Platform vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Parasoft Development Testing Platform 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.