Compare Applitools and Tricentis Testim 
- Users report that Tricentis Testim excels in ease of setup, scoring 9.5, which reviewers mention makes it a great choice for teams looking to quickly implement testing solutions without extensive training.
- Reviewers mention that Applitools shines in test feedback functionality, achieving a score of 8.8, which users say provides detailed insights that help in identifying issues more effectively than its competitors.
- G2 users highlight that Tricentis Testim offers a robust test variety with a score of 9.0, while users on G2 note that Applitools, with a score of 8.6, has slightly less diversity in testing options, which may limit flexibility for some teams.
- Users say that both products have high-quality support, with Tricentis Testim and Applitools both scoring 9.3, indicating that users can expect reliable assistance when needed.
- Reviewers mention that Tricentis Testim has a strong test repository score of 8.8, which users report helps in organizing and managing tests efficiently, while Applitools lacks a specific score in this area, suggesting a potential gap in test management capabilities.
- Users report that Applitools has a slight edge in product direction with a positive score of 8.8, while Tricentis Testim scores 9.4, indicating that both products are seen as forward-thinking, but Applitools may have a more focused roadmap according to some reviewers.
- CI/CD integration
- 3 users
- 3 concurrent sessions
The shallow learning curve for initially implementing it. Typically QAs have less experience working with code and less time to learn. this can make starting a proof of concept or just integrating a plugin into an existinging framework prohibitively...
Bugs and unexplained behaviour. When we had problems with thee Testim integrartion the solutions were sometimes to add steps that were unclear to us.
Testim.io solution simply reduces the time to write test, improves test stability, makes it much easier to detect failure reasons and reduces the time to fix tests. As a developer I depend on automated testing to ensure I can move fast and not break...
It's not ideal for teams like mine that prefer tools with a balance of high flexibility and low to no code options
The shallow learning curve for initially implementing it. Typically QAs have less experience working with code and less time to learn. this can make starting a proof of concept or just integrating a plugin into an existinging framework prohibitively...
Testim.io solution simply reduces the time to write test, improves test stability, makes it much easier to detect failure reasons and reduces the time to fix tests. As a developer I depend on automated testing to ensure I can move fast and not break...
Bugs and unexplained behaviour. When we had problems with thee Testim integrartion the solutions were sometimes to add steps that were unclear to us.
It's not ideal for teams like mine that prefer tools with a balance of high flexibility and low to no code options
