SpecFlow vs Tricentis qTest comparison

SpecFlow and Tricentis qTest are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. SpecFlow is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.5, while Tricentis qTest is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.7. SpecFlow holds a 2.0% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis qTest’s 15.7% 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

347 Views
145 Comparison Views

75% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 16 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,630 Views
1,023 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

SpecFlow

Tricentis qTest

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.

To learn more, read our detailed SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

SpecFlow

Ranking in Test Management Tools

9th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 December 2024, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of SpecFlow is 2.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 15.7%, up from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

KreshenAmourdon

Software Automation Test Engineer at I2era

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

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

"One of the most valuable features of SpecFlow for us is its risk identification capabilities."

"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."

"SpecFlow's best feature is the ability to add additional layers to the programming."

"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."

"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 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 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 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."

"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."

"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

More Tricentis qTest pros

Cons

"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."

"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 would be improved with the addition of functionality reporting, which would be really helpful for automation testing."

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

"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 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."

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

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

"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."

"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."

"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

"SpecFlow is an open-source product."

"SpecFlow is open-source and free of charge."

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

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"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."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"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."

"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

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

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Healthcare Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

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

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?

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 SpecFlow

Compared 61% of the time

TestRail vs SpecFlow

Compared 17% of the time

More SpecFlow Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 28% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 25% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 14% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

PractiTest vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 3% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SpecFlow

November 2024

Download SpecFlow product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

November 2024

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

SpecFlow+

qTest

Learn More

Tricentis

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 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

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

December 2024

Free Report: SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about SpecFlow vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 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.