Compare PractiTest and Zephyr Enterprise 
- Users report that PractiTest excels in its Quality of Support, scoring 9.1, which reviewers mention as being responsive and helpful, while Zephyr Enterprise's support is rated lower at 8.3, indicating potential delays in assistance.
- Reviewers mention that PractiTest's Test Repository feature is highly rated at 8.9, allowing for efficient organization of test cases, whereas Zephyr Enterprise, with a score of 8.8, is noted for its robust capabilities but may not be as user-friendly in navigation.
- G2 users highlight PractiTest's superior Reporting capabilities, scoring 8.6, which provides detailed insights and analytics, while Zephyr Enterprise shines with a higher score of 9.2, praised for its comprehensive reporting features that cater to various stakeholder needs.
- Users on G2 report that PractiTest offers better Customization options, allowing teams to tailor the software to their specific workflows, while Zephyr Enterprise, although customizable, is noted to have a steeper learning curve for these features.
- Reviewers mention that PractiTest's Ease of Use is rated at 8.3, making it more accessible for teams new to test management, compared to Zephyr Enterprise's score of 7.8, which indicates a more complex interface that may require additional training.
- Users say that PractiTest's Automation features, particularly in Automated Creation & Testing, score 9.2, making it a strong choice for teams looking to streamline their testing processes, while Zephyr Enterprise, with a score of 8.8, is effective but may not offer the same level of automation flexibility.
- Issues, Requirements, Tests, and Test Sets & Runs
- Unlimited Custom Fields and Filters
- Unlimited Projects
1. Visibility Visibility Visibility!!! The dashboard is amazing. I can create new tabs for my personal use and use fields and filters for the data. We use also the external dashboards and it really helps us all be aligned (we have it right in-front of the...
Search feature returns are head-scratching--searching for specific test cases rarely return anything useful. Filters and Folders structures are convoluted and archaic--ultimately these become catch-all areas and become useless over time. Mass editing is...
You can Link your defects to Stories. You can Link your defects to Task. You can Link your defects to Requirements. It is really easy to Create Test Cases, Update those test cases, and Cloning those test cases. You can easily Planning the Test Cycle...
Some of the organization is non-intuitive and buggy. I also think that it could be more user-friendly, perhaps with some pre-made templated test cases (titles giving hints on what to test and possible priorities)
1. Visibility Visibility Visibility!!! The dashboard is amazing. I can create new tabs for my personal use and use fields and filters for the data. We use also the external dashboards and it really helps us all be aligned (we have it right in-front of the...
You can Link your defects to Stories. You can Link your defects to Task. You can Link your defects to Requirements. It is really easy to Create Test Cases, Update those test cases, and Cloning those test cases. You can easily Planning the Test Cycle...
Search feature returns are head-scratching--searching for specific test cases rarely return anything useful. Filters and Folders structures are convoluted and archaic--ultimately these become catch-all areas and become useless over time. Mass editing is...
Some of the organization is non-intuitive and buggy. I also think that it could be more user-friendly, perhaps with some pre-made templated test cases (titles giving hints on what to test and possible priorities)
