QMetry Test Management vs Tricentis qTest comparison

QMetry and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. QMetry is ranked #15 with an average rating of 6.0, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. QMetry holds a 2.1% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 16.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Tricentis users are willing to recommend the solution.

QMetry Test Management

Read 1 QMetry Test Management review

163 Views
126 Comparison Views

0% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,500 Views
921 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

QMetry Test Management

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between QMetry Test Management and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 842,388 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

QMetry Test Management

Ranking in Test Management Tools

15th

Average Rating

6.0

Number of Reviews

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of QMetry Test Management is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 16.9%, up from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

VinayKumar17

Team Lead at Graebert India

Helped with agile testing, provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities but visibility of test cases could be improved

QMetry has different aspects. It provides exploratory testing and screen capture capabilities while running tests. It has a recorder integrated. If you run a test on an application, it will record every aspect of it. For example, if you execute a user scenario, it will record what the user does within the application and generate a script. This can also be used for quick automation. Moreover, if we have an automation framework, QMetry can integrate with it. QMetry can also handle load testing in web-based applications. We have integrated it with a bug-tracking system, but not for automation. It was not difficult to integrate it. This integration was mainly for reporting purposes, such as creating reports directly from QMetry.

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 best benefit was for new hires. We used to write our test cases in simple English within QMetry, so anyone who knew English could understand them. This helped with training new hires."

"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."

"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 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."

"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."

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

"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

"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..."

"Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"For me, the visibility could be improved. When executing a test case, you needed to open it separately to read the steps."

"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."

"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."

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

"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 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."

"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."

"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."

More Tricentis qTest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"QMetry was cheaper than Xray, which was based on the number of users."

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

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

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

"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 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."

"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."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

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

842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for QMetry Test Management?

QMetry was cheaper than Xray, which was based on the number of users. It was around $10d per user, while QMetry was closer to $4 per user. So it's about half the price.

See all answers

What needs improvement with QMetry Test Management?

QMetry team upgrade features based on the number of users experiencing certain problems. If fewer users encounter an issue, they may not address it. They have a different concept where feature deve...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for QMetry Test Management?

We use it for test case management. We used it to define valid and invalid inputs and to create tests for both scenarios. This involved manual testing, such as boundary value analysis and exceeding...

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

TestRail vs QMetry Test Management

Compared 100% of the time

More QMetry Test Management Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 32% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 27% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 13% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

February 2025

Download QMetry Test Management product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

March 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

No data available

qTest

Overview

QMetry is a suite of most comprehensive test management products to provide agile testing teams innovative technology platforms to deploy better Quality Software faster with confidence. It has more than 20 integrations. QMetry brand is trusted by 400+ customers globally across many industries including Finance, Healthcare Services, Travel & Hospitality, Retail, Education and High Technology.

QMetry

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

Healthland, Stanford University, Solid Fire, Proteus, Epocrates, Cognifide, Exo, Holmes Corporation, Global Communication, University of Sydney

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

Buyer's Guide

Test Management Tools

February 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.