- Home
- ...
- Software Testing Tools
- IBM Engineering Test Management
- Tricentis qTest
- IBM Engineering Test Management-vs-Tricentis qTest
Compare IBM Engineering Test Management and Tricentis qTest 
- Users report that Tricentis qTest excels in its Test Feedback feature, with a score of 9.2, allowing teams to gather and analyze feedback efficiently, while IBM Engineering Test Management, although solid, scores lower in this area, indicating it may not be as intuitive for feedback collection.
- Reviewers mention that Tricentis qTest's Test Repository functionality is highly rated at 8.9, providing a well-organized space for test cases, whereas IBM Engineering Test Management, while functional, does not match this level of organization, which can lead to challenges in test case management.
- G2 users highlight that Tricentis qTest offers superior Test Variety with a score of 9.2, enabling teams to handle diverse testing needs effectively, while IBM Engineering Test Management, with a lower score, may limit flexibility in testing approaches.
- Users on G2 indicate that IBM Engineering Test Management shines in Ease of Setup, scoring 9.0, making it a favorable choice for teams looking for a quick implementation, whereas Tricentis qTest, with a score of 7.9, may require more time to configure.
- Reviewers say that Tricentis qTest's Automation Organization is rated at 9.3, which is praised for its ability to streamline automated testing processes, while IBM Engineering Test Management, despite being reliable, does not provide the same level of organization for automation tasks.
- Users report that IBM Engineering Test Management has a higher Ease of Admin score at 9.3, suggesting that it may be easier for administrators to manage, while Tricentis qTest, with a score of 8.1, may present more challenges in administrative tasks.
- Free trial with no commitment and no credit card
What I liked the best is that you can manage your entire testing process directly within the tool. It gives you the capability to write your entire test plan, test cases, test scripts and import requirements from ReqPro all within the tool.
The interface is frustrating: it bounces around as one makes entries, there are side panes that slide around until you figure out how to pin them, if you can. Navigation can be idiosyncratic from screen to screen, sometimes requiring one to place one's...
The API allows us to be flexible in our testing strategy. We are able to easily aggregate results from several different sources to give a complete testing picture. This tool seems to have taken a more forward thinking approach vs other tools we evaluated...
Overall support for automated tests is not great: We need to be able to easily integrate with any open source testing framework and it's more code than expected
What I liked the best is that you can manage your entire testing process directly within the tool. It gives you the capability to write your entire test plan, test cases, test scripts and import requirements from ReqPro all within the tool.
The API allows us to be flexible in our testing strategy. We are able to easily aggregate results from several different sources to give a complete testing picture. This tool seems to have taken a more forward thinking approach vs other tools we evaluated...
The interface is frustrating: it bounces around as one makes entries, there are side panes that slide around until you figure out how to pin them, if you can. Navigation can be idiosyncratic from screen to screen, sometimes requiring one to place one's...
Overall support for automated tests is not great: We need to be able to easily integrate with any open source testing framework and it's more code than expected
