No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

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
20th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis qTest
Ranking in Test Management Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is 2.0%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 5.3%, down from 14.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis qTest5.3%
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira2.0%
Other92.7%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RS
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.
reviewer2772063 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Specialist 2A at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Has supported centralized test case management but needs better reporting and integration features
One good feature of Tricentis qTest was that users can directly upload test cases in the tool itself. Unlike ALM, where we had a plugin in Excel and it used to hang very much, this was a really cool feature where users can upload test cases directly into the tool. I have used Tricentis qTest's integration with Jira, but that's why we migrated to Octane tool. There were some hiccups, such as when we updated anything in Tricentis qTest, it wasn't really reflecting in our release container or release manager. I have utilized the customizable dashboards with Tricentis qTest, though they weren't very interactive. I have seen measurable benefits with Tricentis qTest in terms of time-saving and resource-saving. It's definitely time-saving, and also in terms of space, users can have everything centralized instead of having it all in Excel locally, which can be maintained in the repository of Tricentis qTest.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"It is a scalable solution."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"It has taken us to the next level, in a very positive way, in the management of our overall test cases."
"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, which saves us time and improves quality as well."
"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."
"Tricentis qTest brought benefits by providing all test cases in one central repository with easy access."
"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."
"Overall, the solution has increased testing efficiency by a good 95 percent."
"The solution works very well for test management and it also automates a lot of the testing functions so that you don't have to manage them in Excel spreadsheets."
 

Cons

"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."
"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."
"I can't say that we've seen a decrease in critical defects in releases since we started using qTest, but we have more visibility into our test coverage, block test cases, daily activities, etc."
"Overall, it gets the job done, but it's a struggle to do it."
"We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features."
"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."
"I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"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."
"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."
"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?
One of the things I noticed was the reporting part wasn't very good. It was hard to customize the dashboards in Tricentis qTest, and there were limitations in the dashboard. There may be missing fe...
What is your primary use case for Tricentis qTest?
The main use cases for Tricentis qTest are for test management, to keep test cases and execute those. Overall, centralized test management with Tricentis qTest was beneficial for the team's product...
 

Also Known As

No data available
qTest
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.