Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Panaya and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Panaya is ranked #19, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Panaya holds a 2.7% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 15.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Panaya users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Panaya Test Dynamix

Read 4 Panaya Test Dynamix reviews

297 Views
101 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,413 Views
504 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Panaya Test Dynamix

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Tricentis qTest and Panaya Test Dynamix are two powerful test management tools. While Tricentis qTest offers rich test management and automation features, Panaya Test Dynamix is preferred for its real-time risk analysis and impact simulation.

Features: Tricentis qTest is praised for comprehensive test management capabilities, easy integration with various tools, and robust reporting features. Panaya Test Dynamix is commended for its impact analysis tools, detecting changes and their potential effects on tests, and real-time risk insights.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis qTest needs better load times, improved performance in large-scale environments, and a more intuitive user experience. Panaya Test Dynamix requires a more intuitive design, enhanced customization options, and a less complex interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both tools offer cloud-based deployments. Tricentis qTest has a smoother initial setup and better ongoing support, with users commending responsive customer service. Panaya Test Dynamix users report varied experiences with support responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis qTest has a fair pricing model offering good ROI through its extensive features. Panaya Test Dynamix users feel the higher cost is justified due to its unique impact analysis tools, fitting environments needing detailed change impact insights.

To learn more, read our detailed Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Panaya Test Dynamix 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

Panaya Test Dynamix

Ranking in Test Management Tools

19th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Defect Tracking (7th), Functional Testing Tools (26th), Regression Testing Tools (13th)

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 Panaya Test Dynamix is 2.7%, up from 1.9% 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

Alain Vanhaeght

IT Project leader at a construction company with 10,001+ employees

More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options

For the moment we are looking to automated testing, and there today apparently it is not working well with the application we want to test. So we are using an application on a terminal server and some quirks make it challenging to make automatic testing. It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we again have a network connection.

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 most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."

"The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."

"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."

"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."

"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."

"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

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

"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."

"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."

"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 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."

"I like the way it structures a project... We're able to put the test cases into qTest or modify something that's already there, so it's a reusable-type of environment. It is very important that we can do that and change our test data as needed..."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."

"Support is reactive and in English only."

"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."

"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."

"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 support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."

"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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

"It is expensive. Because of its cost, we couldn't deploy Panaya to a large extent. Its licensing should be improved, and there should be more license types. There should be an advanced license and a basic license."

"The solution is rather expensive due to the security it has to offer."

"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."

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

"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 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."

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

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

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

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

16%

Retailer

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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

Tricentis Tosca vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 59% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 10% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 9% of the time

Selenium HQ vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 5% of the time

More Panaya Test Dynamix 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

TFS vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 4% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

June 2025

Download Panaya Test Dynamix product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

June 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Overview

Panaya Test Dynamix makes it easy for large enterprises to test smarter and release faster, by gaining control and visibility of every aspect of their ERP testing wherever they are.

With SAP ERP testing holding unique challenges, Test Dynamix offers provides all test management and execution capabilities in a single place , with a business process-centered approach designed specifically for SAP and Oracle testing, risk-based testing and test automation, to ensure the most efficient and effective large-scale testing possible.

Panaya

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

Over 3000 leading enterprises worldwide including SONY, NICE, NEC, Shiseido, DHL, ABB and Grupo Bimbo

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

Buyer's Guide

Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Tricentis qTest

June 2025

Free Report: Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Panaya Test Dynamix 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.