Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

PractiTest vs TFS comparison

 

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

PractiTest
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
22nd
Ranking in Test Management Tools
17th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
TFS
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
9th
Ranking in Test Management Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
99
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of PractiTest is 3.0%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TFS is 4.6%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
TFS4.6%
PractiTest3.0%
Other92.4%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

DC
Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat
It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.
PS
Service delivery manager at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Ensures team collaboration with strong version control but could improve testing capabilities
Version control is the most basic feature in TFS. It has been there since the beginning. We use it primarily for that purpose. Basically ensuring that the code is not overwritten by other team members and maintaining the sanctity of the code. Bringing order to a disparate team which is virtual at different locations is very important, and TFS provides that control. Once you update a code, nobody can modify it until you are done working on it and check in. It is a great product that revolutionized the way teams work together on Microsoft pieces of code. The versioning part has unique features and capabilities which are unmatched with other products out there.

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 way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"The most valuable features of TFS are the test plans. We can reproduce reusable test plans in test automation. We have a lot of queries and this feature is very useful."
"Since it is a robust solution, I face no performance issues. Also, considering how well the implementation process of the solution was carried out, we never faced any issues while using the solution."
"The initial setup was straightforward: creating a new project, importing code, and setting up branches."
"The initial setup is easy, it is easy to understand and use."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"For what I need TFS for, I have never run into any limitation."
"TFS' most valuable feature is the triage process. It is a robust solution that is easy to use."
"It's user friendly. We haven't had any issues so far. It's flexible. If we need something, we can always contact the owner in our headquarters to make a configuration."
 

Cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
"TFS should have capabilities similar to Git, like storing all types of artifacts in the repository."
"TFS's CI/CD, project pipelines, and management development could be improved."
"There is room for improvement from reporting point of view."
"There might be some complexity in its off-cloud versions."
"One of the areas that could be improved is to have an effective full lifecycle management."
"TFS and MTM have their own style of working and they are different from other tools like Jira or TestRail, which are simpler and easy to use."
"I'd like to see some kind of visualization tool for TFS that would make life much easier."
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"It's just as expensive as HPE ALM, without many of the features, best used for development tool only to avoid higher costs."
"I was working with the engineering team, and that was not under my umbrella. From what I can remember, its license was yearly. They had the licenses on a per-user basis, and they included MTM."
"We pay subscription fees on a yearly basis and the price is reasonable."
"I would like to see TFS improve its web interface as there are some limitations with IDs and the integration behind it and with open source tools like VS Code."
"I believe we pay on a yearly basis. I don't know the current costs of them. We outsource all that to a third party. Each of the developers gets a Microsoft Visual Studio Azure DevOps license, which gives them access to the TFS server as well. We probably pay on average about 1,800 Canadian Dollars a year for every developer, but that covers a lot more than just TFS."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is pretty expensive compared to other project management tools."
"We pay for the license yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
University
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise25
Large Enterprise64
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - TFS or Azure DevOps?
TFS and Azure DevOps are different in many ways. TFS was designed for admins, and only offers incremental improvements. In addition, TFS seems complicated to use and I don’t think it has a very fri...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TFS?
While I do not know the exact pricing, TFS is likely more expensive than GitLab.
What needs improvement with TFS?
From a testing perspective, while the build and deploy automation capability and pipeline integration are already present to a great extent, these are areas where TFS can improve further.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Team Foundation Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
Vendex KBB IT Services, Info Support, Fujitsu Consulting, TCSC, Airways New Zealand, HP
Find out what your peers are saying about PractiTest vs. TFS and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.