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

Tricentis qTest vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Tricentis and Microsoft are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Microsoft is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.5. Tricentis holds a 16.1% mindshare in TMT, compared to Microsoft’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Tricentis users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.
Tricentis qTest
Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews
  • 1,427 Views
  • 893 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Read 52 Visual Studio Test Professional reviews
  • 357 Views
  • 292 Comparison Views
96% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Visual Studio Test Professional and Tricentis qTest are two leading test management solutions. Tricentis qTest appears to have the upper hand due to its extensive features and robust functionality.

Features: Visual Studio Test Professional integrates seamlessly with Azure DevOps, manages test cases efficiently with Microsoft tools, and ensures streamlined workflows. Tricentis qTest supports Agile and DevOps methodologies, offers superior automation capabilities, and provides advanced reporting features. qTest's comprehensive feature set makes it suitable for complex testing environments.

Room for Improvement: Visual Studio Test Professional needs better automation, more flexible reporting options, and an improved user interface. Tricentis qTest could enhance usability, improve integration with third-party tools, and streamline the setup process. Focusing on these enhancements would significantly benefit users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Visual Studio Test Professional's straightforward deployment suits Microsoft-centric environments but has less responsive customer service. Tricentis qTest has a more complex deployment due to broader tool integration but offers highly responsive and supportive customer service. qTest's customer support is a notable advantage.

Pricing and ROI: Visual Studio Test Professional is cost-effective for Microsoft product users. Tricentis qTest has higher upfront costs but provides better ROI due to its extensive features and capabilities. The comprehensive feature set and better ROI make qTest a more attractive long-term option.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 847,862 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

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
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 16.1%, up from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Visual Studio Test Professional is 2.5%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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
ALFONSO LORENZO-RODRÍGUEZ - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides extensive extensions and plugins for seamless AI product development
Our primary use case for Visual Studio Test Professional is as a development tool. We develop software primarily in Python, specifically for applications related to artificial intelligence. We use frameworks like PyTorch for training models and developing applications using these models. This tool…
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

"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."
"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 initial setup was very easy."
"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 integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."
"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 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."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest pros
"It's great for the development of .NET."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems."
"I was satisfied with the support given by customer service."
"The solution is easy to use and they have also integrated with Microsoft."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"The setup is easy and straightforward."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
More Visual Studio Test Professional pros
 

Cons

"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."
"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 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."
"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."
"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."
"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."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest cons
"I would appreciate some enhancements in the interface, maybe adding more color options."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"The interface should be made attractive."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"The server that we use is very slow so that is concerning for us."
"The solution's documentation could be improved for beginners."
"The solution is quite expensive."
More Visual Studio Test Professional cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice
"The tool is expensive in my region."
"The product is very expensive."
"For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is not an expensive solution."
"We pay for the solution annually and the price could be reduced."
"I think that the pricing is quite good."
"The tool is affordable."
"Users have to pay a licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional."
More Visual Studio Test Professional 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
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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
What do you like most about Visual Studio Test Professional?
The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Studio Test Professional?
The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Visual Studio Test Professional?
The product needs contextual help integrated within its interface. Currently, I need to search online to find out how to use certain functions. This feature would save time by providing direct assi...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

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 12% of the time
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest Logo
Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 7% of the time
SpecFlow vs Tricentis qTest Logo
SpecFlow vs Tricentis qTest
Compared 2% of the time
More Tricentis qTest Competitors
Apache JMeter vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Apache JMeter vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 24% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 17% of the time
Qt Squish vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Qt Squish vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 13% of the time
Tricentis Tosca vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 12% of the time
TFS vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
TFS vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 11% of the time
More Visual Studio Test Professional Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Tricentis qTest
March 2025
Tricentis qTest reportDownload Tricentis qTest product report
Buyer's Guide
Visual Studio Test Professional
March 2025
Visual Studio Test Professional reportDownload Visual Studio Test Professional product report
 

Also Known As

qTest
No data available
 

Overview

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
Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
Microsoft
 

Sample Customers

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Buyer's Guide
Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
April 2025
Free Report: Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Tricentis qTest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional 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.