Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Adaptavist and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Adaptavist is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.0, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Adaptavist holds a 2.9% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 16.0% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Adaptavist users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Adaptavist Test Management ...

Read 5 Adaptavist Test Management for Jira reviews

324 Views
221 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,434 Views
919 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Adaptavist Test Management ...

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Tricentis qTest and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira are leading test management tools with distinct features. Despite positive user reviews on pricing and support for Tricentis qTest, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira's feature set often makes it a preferred choice.

Features: Tricentis qTest is praised for its comprehensive test planning and management capabilities, seamless integration with popular tools, and robust reporting features. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is highlighted for its strong integration with Jira, ease of use for Jira users, and detailed test case management features.

Room for Improvement: Users of Tricentis qTest have reported a need for better performance with large data sets, more intuitive navigation, and improved testing analytics. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira users indicate areas for improvement include enhanced user permissions management, more robust test execution reporting, and higher flexibility in custom fields.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis qTest is noted for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is appreciated for its seamless integration with Jira, though some feedback highlights slower response times from customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis qTest users appreciate the competitive pricing and clear ROI in terms of improved testing efficiency. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira users also find the tool cost-effective, especially within the context of Jira, though the perceived value is highly dependent on Jira adoption.

To learn more, read our detailed Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,604 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

Adaptavist Test Management ...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

10th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.9%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 16.0%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Ramakanta Sahu

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.

Read full review

Sudipto Dey

Technical Lead at Linde

It doesn't require installation because you can use it through the URL; it's user-friendly and has an excellent reporting feature

The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better. There's a feature I want to document on the Tricentis Idea Portal for Tricentis qTest, which I hope to see in the next version of the tool. It's a feature available in Micro Focus where you execute a test, and then on a spec level, you mark it as pass or fail. Then at the overall level, Micro Focus will automatically mark the test as a pass if all steps passed or failed, even if one step failed. However, here in Tricentis qTest, you still need to mark the overall level of the test cases. It's not automated, unlike what you have in Micro Focus. If Tricentis adds that feature in Tricentis qTest, it will make life easier for testers.

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

"It is a scalable solution."

"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."

"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."

"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."

"The initial setup was very easy."

"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."

"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 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 solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

"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 integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"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."

"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."

"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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

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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

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

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

37%

Computer Software Company

28%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

See all answers

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?

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Tricentis qTest needs improvement in its repositories' functionality. Unlike Azure, it does not have repositories to upload scripts. Additionally, it lacks features like task addition and tracking ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 37% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 35% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

Compared 29% of the time

More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 34% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 27% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 13% 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

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira

May 2025

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira report

Download Adaptavist Test Management for Jira product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

April 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Overview

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is the full, featured, enterprise ready test management solution directly in Jira. It offers full traceability across issues, requirements, test cases, and execution. The tool allows for flexibility and customisation for test plans and runs. It offers a free and flexible REST API, includes the ability to automate bulk tests, and enables seamless integration with most continuous integration tools. The in-depth reporting capability gives users the ability to analyse and share test data results between development and business teams. It’s the single source of truth to track, manage and optimise your whole test lifecycle right inside Jira software.

Try it now https://marketplace.atlassian....

See the overview video

Benefits:

Drive reusability across Jira with cross-project hierarchical repositories for all test assets
Improve collaboration with flexible workflows between traditional and Agile development teams
Enhance coverage with end-to-end traceability across all test artifacts
Eliminate duplication to increase efficiency with versioning, test data parameters and shared step features
Improve visibility and functionality with 70 cross-project reports and gadgets
Reduce management time and effort, with rich APIs for integration with test automation and DevOps tools
Allows teams to seamlessly collaborate and manage multiple versions of test cases in parallel while providing an audit history of changes

Features:

Easy drag and drop organisation, planning and execution
Hierarchical folders to manage and reuse assets across Jira projects, releases and sprints
Test case libraries including versioning, shared steps and test data parameters
Test plans and runs to manage and track test execution cycles
Full traceability of test cases, requirements, test execution results and defects
70 cross-project reports, gadgets and Confluence Macros to track the coverage of your tests with advanced cross project reporting
Global and project level settings for customisation and standardisation
Custom fields for test cases, test steps, test plans and test runs
Migration function to import test cases from files or legacy test management tools
REST APIs for integration with test automation and DevOp tools

Use Cases:

Integrate CI tools such as Jenkins, Bamboo, Travis CI or other development applications like Github, Bitbucket, Datadog via the REST API for end-to-end integration across test case management, execution, and reporting
Automate testing at scale, whilst maintaining traceability inside Jira. Scaled to 10,000+ tests across multiple configurations, publishing results in Jira in under 30 minutes
Increase efficiency by significantly reducing time spent on test case specification and management
Benefit from reusability across Jira projects and single points of maintenance when reusing and organizing test cases
Improved visibility of software testing process and quality with 70 out-of-the-box reports, including real-time dashboards
Clear end-to-end traceability of requirements, tests, and defects ensuring that the delivered software meets requirements.

Adaptavist

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

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear, Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient

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

Buyer's Guide

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest

April 2025

Free Report: Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Adaptavist Test Management for Jira 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.