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

Original Software Qualify vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Original Software Qualify
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (29th)
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Test Management Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Original Software Qualify and Visual Studio Test Professional aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Original Software Qualify is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 0.9%, up 0.5% compared to last year.
Visual Studio Test Professional, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.5% mindshare, up 0.9% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Original Software Qualify0.9%
Jira11.4%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.7%
Other78.0%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Visual Studio Test Professional2.5%
Tricentis Tosca9.2%
OpenText Functional Testing8.7%
Other79.6%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Konstantinos Tasiopoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Group Integration Tools Manager at TITAN
Flexible, multifunctional, and stable testing software with good technical support
I've been using the latest version of Original Software Qualify AQM. Over 100 users in our company use Original Software Qualify AQM. We only have two people in charge of its deployment and maintenance. This software is extensively used in our company. Personally, I recommend Original Software Qualify AQM to other people looking into implementing it. You can do a lot of things with this software. The support is very good. The communication is very good, and they also listen to problems raised. They add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues. It's a very good tool and I recommend it. We've seen a return on investment from this software. I'm rating Original Software Qualify AQM a nine out of ten, because of several reasons: It's very good software, it's a supportive company, and we have very good results from it. This software also minimizes the effort of UATs, and it also allows us to deploy whatever we want.
Payel Saha - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Integrated collaboration with automated test management has improved our agile workflows and continuously supports quality reporting
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio Code, we have an agent mode for GitHub Copilot, which is very helpful in testing or development phases, while Visual Studio's GitHub Copilot is a bit tricky and sometimes does not provide my desired output.For future improvements, I would like to see prompt fixing, as currently, if something goes wrong in Visual Studio, the fixing options are not always correct. If that intelligence is embedded, it would be very helpful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You can do a lot of things with this software; the support is very good, the communication is very good, they listen to problems raised, add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues, and we have seen a return on investment from this software."
"Flexible software with multiple functions, e.g. scenario deployment, new entity creation, workflow creation, etc. Technical support for this software is very good."
"Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software."
"It is a very common and strong product, and a lot of support is available for this product."
"The product is good to create big or small projects fastly. It is one of the leaders in the area."
"My advice to anybody researching this solution is that this tool is a must."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects."
"The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective."
 

Cons

"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports. Its reporting function needs improvement."
"There are some bugs, and sometimes it runs very slowly, but nothing that is major."
"The stability of this solution needs to be improved because sometimes it hangs and crashes."
"Over the years, I haven't identified any specific enhancements that I desire; Visual Studio has consistently met my requirements seamlessly and flawlessly."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"The interface should be made attractive."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"There are not any specific areas for improvement since there are so many libraries and frameworks already available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This software is moderately priced."
"We pay for the solution annually and the price could be reduced."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional, which is expensive."
"The pricing is expensive."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is not an expensive solution."
"We have licensing for Visual Studio Community edition."
"Our company pays a yearly licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional."
"For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person."
"We use the solution’s community version, and the solution’s pricing could be cheaper."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Construction Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
9%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Studio Test Professional?
The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective.
What needs improvement with Visual Studio Test Professional?
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio C...
What is your primary use case for Visual Studio Test Professional?
We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for automation testing, specifically using C# Selenium.Visual Studio Test Case Management, which is embedded in Azure DevOps itself, is part of our process. We ...
 

Also Known As

Qualify
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CertainTeed, Marston's,  Edrington, Ageas,  iPERS.
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.