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

Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Broadcom and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Broadcom is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Broadcom holds a 3.0% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 16.1% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.
Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Read 20 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reviews
  • 325 Views
  • 163 Comparison Views
90% 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 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are prominent tools in the software development lifecycle. Tricentis qTest has the upper hand for ease of use and testing features, while Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer excels in requirements management and modeling for complex projects.

Features: Tricentis qTest offers intuitive test management, seamless integration with other tools, and strong reporting functionalities. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer provides advanced modeling, requirements traceability, and automation capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis qTest could benefit from enhanced performance and additional integration options. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer needs a more intuitive interface and simplified navigation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis qTest scores well for ease of deployment, with a straightforward setup process and reliable customer support. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer's deployment is more complex, but its customer service is highly regarded for technical expertise.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis qTest users report satisfactory pricing and good ROI, especially for small to midsize projects. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is more expensive, justified by its extensive feature set and higher ROI for large-scale implementations.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 848,253 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

Broadcom Agile Requirements...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Application Requirements Management (8th), Test Design Automation (1st)
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 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is 3.0%, 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

Gireesh Subramonian - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps the development team to finish tasks within the required timeframe
The team I am working with was never into Agile before. We have a daily scrum-call and before that, we have to define all the tasks that we are going to work on for a number of sprints. For example, there is a Product Increment Planning meeting where we put all the user requirements into the product backlog. Then we put them back to the respective sprints. A product increment consists of about five iterations, or five sprints. And we pull each of these backlog items to these particular sprints or iterations, so that it is easy for the development team to pick up, based on the priority. The backlog is set, and it is pulled into particular sprints, based on business priority. So it helps the development team to take up and finish tasks within the required timeframe. It helps in productivity, traceability, and saves time.
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

"I like the way Broadcom ARD inserts test cases in execution mode. Also, ARD can be used apart from Broadcom TDM. It's an add-on through which you supply data through ARD test cases when there is a need for extra data."
"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"​The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
"Defects can be traced in the solution."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer pros
"The initial setup was very 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."
"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 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."
"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."
"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."
"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."
More Tricentis qTest pros
 

Cons

"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"CA ARD doesn't provide integration with Tosca. The possibility of creating a test case and exporting it into Tosca is not available. Integration with end-to-end automation tools, like Worksoft or Tosca, is not provided by CA ARD as of now."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer cons
"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."
"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."
"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."
"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."
"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."
"The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Recommendation is to go with concurrent licenses as oppose to seat license; this gives more flexibility."
"At present, Broadcom works through partners rather than dealing directly with the consumer. When there are discounts given, it's up to the partner as to whether they want to give that discount to the customer. Sometimes, the partners decide to take the discount themselves. Pricewise, I would give ARD's price a rating of three out of five."
"This tool reduces the cost associated with test cases, automation script generation, and maintenance costs."
"​The cost of the tool was well worth the benefit that we saw on the back-end."
"We were able to scale down some resources to basically self-fund our ability to purchase the tool."
"The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs."
"It is less costly when compared to other tools on the market."
"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 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."
"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."
"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
"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."
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
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Energy/Utilities Company
25%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
The pricing model is based on how many people are using it. We have an annual license. There are not any additional costs.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer?
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework.
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 Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 42% of the time
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 35% of the time
IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Logo
IBM DOORS vs Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
Compared 23% of the time
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Competitors
Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 32% 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 13% of the time
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 7% 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
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer
April 2025
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer reportDownload Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer product report
Buyer's Guide
Tricentis qTest
March 2025
Tricentis qTest reportDownload Tricentis qTest product report
 

Also Known As

Grid Tools Agile Designer, CA ARD, CA Agile Requirements Designer
qTest
 

Overview

CA Agile Requirements Designer is an end-to-end requirements gathering, test automation and test case design tool which drastically reduces manual testing effort and enables organizations to deliver quality software to market earlier and at less cost. The optimal set of manual or automated tests can be derived automatically from requirements modeled as unambiguous flowcharts and are linked to the right data and expected results. These tests are updated automatically when the requirements change, allowing organizations to deliver quality software which reflects changing user needs.
Broadcom

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

Williams, Rabobank
McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
Buyer's Guide
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest
April 2025
Free Report: Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer 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.