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 8.7. Panaya holds a 2.3% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 16.4% 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

298 Views
159 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 16 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,554 Views
982 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: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Panaya Test Dynamix vs. Tricentis qTest

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,158 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

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Defect Tracking (5th), Functional Testing Tools (27th), Regression Testing Tools (14th)

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Panaya Test Dynamix is 2.3%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 16.4%, up from 9.9% 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

Sudipto Dey

Technical Lead at Linde

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

"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."

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

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

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

"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 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 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."

"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."

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

"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 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."

"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."

"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..."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

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

"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."

"Support is reactive and in English only."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

"Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

"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."

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

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"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

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 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."

"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

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

831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

21%

Computer Software Company

14%

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

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?

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 expe...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 62% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 9% of the time

Selenium HQ vs Panaya Test Dynamix

Compared 7% of the time

More Panaya Test Dynamix Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 29% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 26% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 13% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 9% of the time

TFS vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

January 2025

Download Panaya Test Dynamix product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

December 2024

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Learn More

Panaya

Tricentis

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.

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.

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

January 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: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,158 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.