Tricentis qTest vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Tricentis Logo
1,999 views|1,217 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Microsoft Logo
701 views|584 comparisons
97% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

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.
To learn more, read our detailed Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional Report (Updated: March 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"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 solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless.""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.""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.""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...""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 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 →

"The user interface is very friendly.""I was satisfied with the support given by customer service.""Customization is the most powerful feature of this product.""Visual Studio is highly powerful. It's probably the best software development tool on the market.""The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems.""You can easily write code, test, and deploy within the same environment. It is a mature tool. It regularly receives new updates and versions. In my opinion, it's one of the best products by Microsoft for developers.""Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software.""Easy to use and easily scalable."

More Visual Studio Test Professional Pros →

Cons
"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.""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.""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.""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 user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved.""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.""Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum.""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."

More Tricentis qTest Cons →

"The data flow can be improved.""The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier.""The solution can improve the startup time.""It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux.""The documentation is limited.""One of the problems with this solution is you need to be highly technically skilled to operate it, it is not for everyone.""The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers.""Sometimes, the product is too complex to use."

More Visual Studio Test Professional Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
  • "Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
  • "It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
  • "We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."
  • "We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • More Tricentis qTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person."
  • "I think that the pricing is quite good."
  • "The pricing is expensive."
  • "We pay for the solution annually and the price could be reduced."
  • "There is a paid version of the solution as well as a community version that is free."
  • "Visual Studio Test Professional is a very expensive solution."
  • "The tool is expensive in my region."
  • "We pay a yearly licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional, which is expensive."
  • More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability.
    Top Answer:Visual Studio Test Professional is not an expensive solution.
    Top Answer:The solution's documentation could be improved because it keeps disappearing from the solution. There used to be references material that were incorporated in the solution, but most of it has moved to… more »
    Ranking
    6th
    Views
    1,999
    Comparisons
    1,217
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    761
    Rating
    8.7
    5th
    Views
    701
    Comparisons
    584
    Reviews
    30
    Average Words per Review
    283
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    qTest
    Learn More
    Overview

    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. 

    Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
    Sample Customers
    McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
    Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Insurance Company18%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company38%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Healthcare Company6%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Insurance Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise72%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise28%
    Large Enterprise48%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    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.