Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Broadcom and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Broadcom is ranked #13, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Broadcom holds a 3.2% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 15.2% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Read 20 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reviews

369 Views
165 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,413 Views
504 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Tricentis qTest and Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are prominent tools in the software development lifecycle. Tricentis qTest has the upper hand for ease of use and testing features, while Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer excels in requirements management and modeling for complex projects.

Features: Tricentis qTest offers intuitive test management, seamless integration with other tools, and strong reporting functionalities. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer provides advanced modeling, requirements traceability, and automation capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis qTest could benefit from enhanced performance and additional integration options. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer needs a more intuitive interface and simplified navigation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis qTest scores well for ease of deployment, with a straightforward setup process and reliable customer support. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer's deployment is more complex, but its customer service is highly regarded for technical expertise.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis qTest users report satisfactory pricing and good ROI, especially for small to midsize projects. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is more expensive, justified by its extensive feature set and higher ROI for large-scale implementations.

To learn more, read our detailed Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,592 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

Broadcom Agile Requirements...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

13th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Requirements Management (11th), Test Design Automation (3rd)

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 July 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 15.2%, up from 11.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

Gireesh Subramonian

Assistant Director at Ernst & Young

Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe

The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints. A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority. So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.

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 scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."

"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."

"The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases."

"Defects can be traced in the solution."

"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."

"The modeling is a game-changer."

"Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that."

"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros

"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 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 initial setup was very easy."

"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."

"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 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."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."

"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."

"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."

"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."

"The solution could improve security and authentication."

"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."

"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."

"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons

"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."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from 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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."

"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."

"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."

"The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."

"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."

"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."

"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."

"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."

"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."

"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 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."

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

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Energy/Utilities Company

25%

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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?

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

IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 40% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 33% of the time

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

Compared 27% of the time

More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 32% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 26% 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

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer

June 2025

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer report

Download Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

June 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer

qTest

Overview

CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.

Broadcom

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

Williams, Rabobank

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

Buyer's Guide

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest

June 2025

Free Report: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer 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.