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

SpecFlow vs Tricentis qTest comparison

SpecFlow and Tricentis qTest are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. SpecFlow is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.5, while Tricentis qTest is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. SpecFlow holds a 1.8% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis qTest’s 16.1% mindshare. Additionally, 75% of SpecFlow users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis qTest users who would recommend it.
SpecFlow
Read 4 SpecFlow reviews
  • 272 Views
  • 115 Comparison Views
75% willing to recommend
Tricentis qTest
Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews
  • 1,427 Views
  • 893 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Tricentis qTest and SpecFlow are two prominent software testing tools, competing in the software testing category. Tricentis qTest appears to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive test management capabilities.

Features: Tricentis qTest offers extensive test management, automation capabilities, and support for large-scale projects. SpecFlow shines with BDD integrations, .NET framework compatibility, and seamless integration with development processes.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis qTest could benefit from better integration with third-party tools, a more intuitive system for managing test cases, and streamlined workflows. SpecFlow users desire better documentation, a smoother setup process, and enhancements in ease of use.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis qTest is praised for its smooth deployment and commendable customer support. SpecFlow has a straightforward deployment but occasionally requires technical knowledge, and customer service receives mixed reviews, with some users seeking quicker resolution times.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis qTest is priced on the higher end but is considered a worthwhile investment due to its robust feature set. SpecFlow, being open-source, offers a cost-effective solution, though additional costs for integrations and commercial support may arise.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: March 2025).
Buyer's Guide
SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest
March 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 845,406 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

SpecFlow
Ranking in Test Management Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis qTest
Ranking in Test Management Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of SpecFlow is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 16.1%, up from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KreshenAmourdon - PeerSpot reviewer
An automation solution with good integration capabilities that needs to focus on providing an option for chain testing to its users
In our company, we need to maintain the scripts of the product daily, and in case of failures, we need to check out the scripts. I would recommend the product to those planning to use it based on both they are planning to build. If you are going for unit testing or small scripts, then you can go with SpecFlow. I don't have much experience with the solution. It is a good and straightforward product. It is also an easy-to-use and user-friendly product that can easily adapt to any framework. I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.
Read full review
Sudipto Dey - PeerSpot reviewer
It doesn't require installation because you can use it through the URL; it's user-friendly and has an excellent reporting feature
The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better. There's a feature I want to document on the Tricentis Idea Portal for Tricentis qTest, which I hope to see in the next version of the tool. It's a feature available in Micro Focus where you execute a test, and then on a spec level, you mark it as pass or fail. Then at the overall level, Micro Focus will automatically mark the test as a pass if all steps passed or failed, even if one step failed. However, here in Tricentis qTest, you still need to mark the overall level of the test cases. It's not automated, unlike what you have in Micro Focus. If Tricentis adds that feature in Tricentis qTest, it will make life easier for testers.
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

"One of the most valuable features of SpecFlow for us is its risk identification capabilities."
"SpecFlow's best feature is the ability to add additional layers to the programming."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is unit testing...It is also an easy-to-use and user-friendly product that can easily adapt to any framework."
"The initial setup is easy."
"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."
"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 solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."
"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"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."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest pros
 

Cons

"SpecFlow would be improved with the addition of functionality reporting, which would be really helpful for automation testing."
"I'd prefer in TFS if we could be writing test cases, not in the old classical version. We should be writing in Gherkin and then automatically have it convert that Gherkin test case into SpecFlow feature files."
"SpecFlow's installation and configuration can be a bit challenging due to its flexibility as an open-source tool."
"Regarding improvement, it would be good if SpecFlow could provide chain testing, which it currently doesn't allow."
"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."
"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."
"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SpecFlow is an open-source product."
"SpecFlow is open-source and free of charge."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice
report
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
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Healthcare Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SpecFlow?
One of the most valuable features of SpecFlow for us is its risk identification capabilities.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SpecFlow?
SpecFlow is an open-source product. You just use SpecFlow's plugin capabilities or add it to your existing framework.
See all answers
What needs improvement with SpecFlow?
In terms of improvement, SpecFlow's installation and configuration can be a bit challenging due to its flexibility as an open-source tool. While it offers a balanced flexibility, setting it up migh...
See all answers
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 SpecFlow Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs SpecFlow
Compared 100% of the time
More SpecFlow Competitors
Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 33% of the time
OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest Logo
OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 27% of the time
TestRail vs Tricentis qTest Logo
TestRail vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 12% of the time
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 8% of the time
Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 5% of the time
More Tricentis qTest Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
SpecFlow
March 2025
SpecFlow reportDownload SpecFlow product report
Buyer's Guide
Tricentis qTest
March 2025
Tricentis qTest reportDownload Tricentis qTest product report
 

Also Known As

SpecFlow+
qTest
 

Overview

SpecFlow is a testing framework that supports Behaviour Driven Development (BDD). It lets us define application behavior in plain meaningful English text using a simple grammar defined by a language called Gherkin.

Tricentis

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

Microsoft, Caterpillar, Siemens, Charles Schwab, IBM, Deloitte, Accenture, Philips, Dell, Deutsche Bank
McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
Buyer's Guide
SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest
March 2025
Free Report: SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest
Find out what your peers are saying about SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our SpecFlow 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.