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

CucumberStudio vs Tricentis qTest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

CucumberStudio
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (25th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (13th)
Tricentis qTest
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. CucumberStudio is designed for Rapid Application Development Software and holds a mindshare of 0.8%, up 0.1% compared to last year.
Tricentis qTest, on the other hand, focuses on Test Management Tools, holds 5.8% mindshare, down 16.0% since last year.
Rapid Application Development Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CucumberStudio0.8%
Microsoft Power Apps7.8%
Oracle Application Express (APEX)4.9%
Other86.5%
Rapid Application Development Software
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis qTest5.8%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail5.9%
Other78.9%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Expert at Bertelsmann SE & Co.
Facilitates integration of test scenarios while needing modernization of components
CucumberStudio is primarily used for designing test scenarios and automating testing. We have implemented it in conjunction with our own routines for integration into our infrastructure CucumberStudio aligns with our strategy for data-driven testing. It supports our product owners in designing…
reviewer2356440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
User stories and test artifacts migrate seamlessly to innovative management tools
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 looking to make this transition. We have developed capabilities for automated migration from ALM to Tricentis qTest without any loss of data. However, for UFT to Tosca migration, scripts need to be rewritten as there are no automatic converters available. From a project perspective, there have not been many challenges with Tricentis products. The main improvement area would be developing a connector to move UFT scripts to Tosca, which would enable quicker and easier movement for customers. This would aid faster adoption of Tosca and ease the financial pressure on clients who currently need to invest in rewriting scripts.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Scenarios, since is a really easy way to create and control your test cases."
"CucumberStudio aligns with our strategy for data-driven testing."
"The best thing is that a person without knowledge about the program can easily understand what happened in our testing process."
"The most valuable feature of CucumberStudio is its use of action words, which allows me to avoid writing test cases from scratch for the most common scenarios."
"Hiptest is a great test management tool for agile teams."
"The most valuable feature is the re-usability of action words."
"The data table that helps in converting a single script to multiple test cases is very helpful."
"Integration with automation frameworks, keywords, and tags allows for saving time writing test cases and implementing automation."
"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."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."
"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."
"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 about 60 percent, compared to what they were doing before."
"It's quite easy to use and integrate with any popular tools you might already be using and I would definitely recommend it."
 

Cons

"The reporting needs to be improved."
"CucumberStudio's API integration could be improved both in terms of reliability and design."
"It needs some improvement when exporting scenarios into automation code, to make it easier to manage the repeatable action words and tests."
"Another kind of deployment might be useful, perhaps an option to install the tool in a local deployment."
"Yes, it is not stable when you create a data table that includes more than 30 elements, so it can lose your data."
"Copy-pasting something directly from JIRA requires too much modification and formatting."
"Support with In-App chat is great. However, it would be awesome to have real time support also for PT timezone."
"I think it would be better if we could also do the reporting with CucumberStudio."
"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."
"Right now, on a scale of one to five, I would say the Insights reporting engine is a three because we are facing some performance issues."
"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."
"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."
"Overall, it gets the job done, but it's a struggle to do it."
"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from 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."
"We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."
"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."
"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."
"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
17%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Hiptest?
CucumberStudio's API integration could be improved both in terms of reliability and design. The API requires data to be sent in a specific format, which takes time to build. Additionally, the repor...
What is your primary use case for Hiptest?
I use CucumberStudio as a test case repository. All of our test cases are stored there. It is also part of our test planning process. For every sprint, we plan the test cases in CucumberStudio and ...
What advice do you have for others considering Hiptest?
For teams following a BDD style software development approach, CucumberStudio is a great collaborative tool that covers all the basic requirements of a test management tool. I would rate CucumberSt...
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

Hiptest
qTest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Cardinal Health, Intuit, Smartbox, Accenture, Deliveroo
McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, ServiceNow, Oracle and others in Rapid Application Development Software. Updated: May 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.