--- title: Tricentis qTest Reviews meta_title: 'Tricentis qTest Reviews 2026: Details, Pricing, & Features | G2' meta_description: Filter 104 reviews by the users' company size, role or industry to find out how Tricentis qTest works for a business like yours. aggregate_rating: rating_value: 4.3 review_count: 104 scale: '5' date_modified: '2026-11-11' parent_category: name: Development url: https://www.g2.com/categories/development ---

Tricentis qTest Reviews & Product Details

Profile Status

This profile is currently managed by Tricentis qTest but has limited features.

Are you part of the Tricentis qTest team? Upgrade your plan to enhance your branding and engage with visitors to your profile!

Pricing

Pricing provided by Tricentis qTest.

Basic

$1,000.00
Per User Per Year

User Insights

Average based on 104 real user reviews.

Implementation Time

2 months

Perceived Cost

$$$$$

Typical contract price

$0k - $0k

Sign in to view

Per Year

Tricentis qTest Reviews FAQs

Generated using AI

Last updated: Nov 04, 2026

What is Tricentis qTest, and what problem is it built to solve?

Tricentis is a continuous testing and quality engineering platform focused on software testing for agile development and complex enterprise applications. It is intended to help enterprises accelerate releases, reduce costs, and improve software quality.

What languages does Tricentis qTest support?

Tricentis qTest supports one language: English.

What company sizes and industries is Tricentis qTest the best fit for?

Positive-use cases span small businesses, mid-market organizations, and enterprises, with the strongest presence across mid-market and enterprise teams. The industries represented most prominently include software and IT, healthcare, and financial services.
  • Company size: Mid-market and enterprise teams are especially well represented, alongside small businesses.
  • Industries: Computer software and IT services, healthcare, and financial services are prominent use cases.

How long does it take to implement Tricentis qTest across a team?

Implementation timelines vary, but teams most often report getting qTest live in under a month. Some teams describe quicker starts, while others report taking several months or longer.
Time to go live Relative frequency
Under 1 month Most common
Under 1 day Also reported
1–3 months Also reported
3–6 months or over 12 months Less common

What customer support options does Tricentis qTest provide, and how do users find the overall support experience?

Support is available through self-service resources, email/help desk, and chat, with 24/7 live-rep support. The experience is mixed: users value responsive, helpful assistance and product guidance, while some describe frustrating follow-up or difficulty getting issues resolved.

What is the experience like for teams switching to Tricentis qTest from another tool?

Moving to qTest from legacy test-management and ALM tools, including HP ALM/OpenText Quality Center and TestLink, has often been driven by a desire for easier workflows, stronger Jira integration, and better visibility into test execution. Users describe improvements in centralizing test work and connecting requirements, tests, and defects, though setup and integration can take extra effort.

What tools and platforms does Tricentis qTest integrate with, and how do these integrations help users get more value from the product?

Tricentis qTest offers 3 integrations. The integrations users discuss span issue and project tracking, test and API tools, and CI/CD workflows.
  • Issue and project tracking: Jira
  • Test and API tools: ReadyAPI, Selenium, Tosca, and TestNG
  • CI/CD workflows: Azure Pipelines and Jenkins
These connections help link requirements and defects to test cases, bring automated results into test executions, and give QA and development teams a shared view of progress. Some integrations require additional configuration.

What features or capabilities could make Tricentis qTest even more useful?

More flexible reporting and smoother performance on large projects would make qTest more useful. Users also point to opportunities to simplify workflows and make integrations with automation tools easier to configure.
  • Expand report customization and make it easier to build and reuse detailed views.
  • Improve responsiveness when handling large test repositories and datasets.
  • Simplify test-case and test-suite workflows, including project organization and administration.
  • Make automation and open-source tool integrations easier to set up and manage.

Tricentis qTest Reviews (104)

Reviews

Tricentis qTest Reviews (104)

4.3
104 reviews

What do users say?

Generated using AI from real user reviews

Pros & Cons

Generated from real user reviews
View All Pros and Cons
Search reviews
Filter Reviews
Clear Results
G2 reviews are authentic and verified.
Rahul S.
RS
Rahul S.
Lead Engineer
Mid-Market (51-1000 emp.)
"qTest is a Tricentis paid test repository"
4/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Best include it's seamless integration with Tricentis Tosca and Atlassian Jira Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

The tool is not opensource and can't be integrated easily with opensource solutions Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Colby D.
CD
Colby D.
Release Engineer
Mid-Market (51-1000 emp.)
"Scalable and reliable end-to-end mobile testing"
4/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo’s technology is unlike any other that we have used before. Waldo tests our app from a real user's perspective, making it less sensitive to UI changes. Waldo can find elements even if they change position, ID or size, allowing tests to complete successfully more often, even if there are changes to the UI that move the elements around slightly. This means that our tests pass more often, and their Assertion feature lets us know when Waldo has found changes that did not keep the test from running but likely need to be reviewed. Waldo even has a flakiness result, so we know if a test is flaky and can update it. We have also been able to use advanced features, including deep linking, and branches, which allows us to run test suites on our PRs before we merge to main. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

As with any young company, the product continues to evolve and change (for the better!) but sometimes, that requires us to rethink how we use Waldo, even if it is for the better. We have occasionally had issues with the execution speed of our test suits, but the Waldo team has worked with us to help come up with ways both our team and theirs can help improve the speed of our tests. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Verified User in Computer Software
UC
Verified User in Computer Software
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
Originally submitted 11/17/2022
"Reimaging how mobile testing is done"
5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo is the most complete and reliable mobile testing technology on the market. It has changed how our engineers are involved in the testing process. Our developers now test earlier in the development process and can be responsible for finding and fixing bugs before they merge code. This creates a greater confidence throughout the organization about app releases. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

There are certain edge cases that are hard to test with Waldo. This is not Waldo’s fault but there is always part of you that wishes you could automate all your tests. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Ikey B.
IB
Ikey B.
Software Engineer
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
"Waldo is the easiest way to setup end-to-end testing for native apps without writing testing code"
4.5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Ease of use when it comes to recording tests. And their support team is A+. We have a slack channel with them, and they actively reach out with tips on improving our test suite + overall testing process for a better experience. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

In a typical code-first testing approach, tests are updated alongside code updates to ensure the test suite is always passing in the main branch. With a no-code system, we push new code and only update outdated tests once they break after merging the new code. Waldo has features to help mitigate this, but we've found it easier to let old tests fail once the new code gets merged and then update them once we get notified through their slack integration. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Julien B.
JB
Julien B.
CTO
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
"Automated mobile testing built for engineers"
5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo’s technology has changed the way that we build and release our mobile app. Instead of spending lots of time doing manual testing, where we are likely to miss errors, we now use Waldo to test at scale. The replay engine is very flexible and, in comparison to scripting, actually tests the app like a human would without predetermined steps. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

As with any new developer tool, there is a learning curve to using it but the Waldo team is responsive and always willing to help. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Jeremy W.
JW
Jeremy W.
Co-Founder
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
Business partner of the seller or seller's competitor, not included in G2 scores.
"We ship earlier and more often with Waldo"
5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo saves us a ton of time and reduces the risk of regressions by automating end-to-end tests for our telehealth app. It's magic, and the product and team keep getting better. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

End-to-end tests are slow, especially on mobile. Can't blame Waldo for that, though. They have made it possible to get feedback from the tests faster and sooner, and it's faster and more reliable (not to mention cheaper!) than manual regression testing. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Nuno R.
NR
Nuno R.
Senior Engineering Manager
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
"The most complete mobile testing tool on the market today"
5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo’s platform is extremely easy to use and very powerful. Everyone in our mobile team (technical hands-on or not) is able to efficiently create and run end-to-end mobile tests to ensure we have a higher quality application. Their product is the most robust solution on the market and they have an incredible customer service team that is helpful and willing to listen to customer feedback. We are excited about what the future holds for us with Waldo. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

We would love it if Waldo could support the testing of our desktop frontend applications as well because the platform is really good. Additionally, as with any premium product, the cost is higher than other solutions on the market. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Verified User in Information Technology and Services
UI
Verified User in Information Technology and Services
Enterprise (> 1000 emp.)
Originally submitted 8/24/2022
"Qtest"
4/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Tricentis QTest is a Test Case and Test Suite Database which is mainly used by testers for tracking the status of test sprints. It is quite useful for sharing and maintaining the test status. It can be easily integrated with Jira. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

It is a database for maintaining the test data for testers in a large organization and large teams. Small Test teams and organizations can use some other methods for tracking the test status. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Jeff S.
JS
Jeff S.
Co-founder, VP of Engineering
Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)
"Waldo helps us move faster"
5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

Waldo helps us move faster by giving us confidence that our core flows are working every time we deploy our app. There's lots to rave about with Waldo, but here's what stands out most:

- it was trivial to introduce into our deployment pipeline

- their test builder is super easy to use

- we rarely experience flakey tests

- their team is highly responsive and very receptive to feedback

- they're constantly shipping improvements to the product, giving me confidence that they'll continue to support us as we grow Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

There are very few downsides to using Waldo. Their product solves the problem very well. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

D L.
DL
D L.
Product Specialist
"Waldo Review"
4.5/5
What do you like best about Tricentis qTest?

It's super easy to use, and it's pretty easy to maintain. The team is responsive to support, and they're making frequent product improvements. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about Tricentis qTest?

Unexpected Waldo bugs can have outsized negative impacts on your integration, and there are still lots of tools & improvements needed for managing your integration. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Questions about Tricentis qTest? Ask real users or explore answers from the community

Get practical answers, real workflows, and honest pros and cons from the G2 community or share your insights.

Verified User in Security and Investigations
G2
Verified User in Security and Investigations
•
Last activity over 6 years ago

is qtest a web-based tool?

Verified User
G2
Verified User
•
Last activity over 6 years ago

On-Boarding, Training, and continued support is a must have for any tool we adopt. How does QASymphony fit into our success?

Pricing Options

Pricing provided by Tricentis qTest.

Basic

$1,000.00
Per User Per Year
Tricentis qTest Comparisons
Tricentis qTest Features
Reporting
Version Control
Scaling
Test Feedback
Test History
Customization
Test Repository
Integration
Test Diversity
Organization
Reliability
Thoroughness