Compare Qase and Zephyr Enterprise 
- Users report that Zephyr Enterprise excels in its Reporting capabilities, scoring 9.2, which allows for detailed insights into test results and project progress. In contrast, Qase's reporting feature received a lower score of 8.6, indicating it may not provide the same level of depth in analytics.
- Reviewers mention that Qase shines in Ease of Use with a score of 9.3, making it more user-friendly for teams new to test management. Zephyr Enterprise, while functional, has a lower score of 7.8, suggesting a steeper learning curve for new users.
- G2 users highlight that Qase offers superior Quality of Support, with a score of 9.6, indicating prompt and effective assistance. Zephyr Enterprise, with a score of 8.3, may not match the responsiveness and helpfulness that Qase users experience.
- Users on G2 report that Zephyr Enterprise has a robust Test Repository feature, scoring 8.8, which allows for effective organization of test cases. Qase, however, outperforms with a score of 9.4, suggesting a more comprehensive and user-friendly repository system.
- Reviewers mention that Qase's Customization options are highly rated at 8.4, allowing teams to tailor the software to their specific needs. In comparison, Zephyr Enterprise's customization features are less flexible, which may limit user adaptability.
- Users say that while both products offer Integration capabilities, Zephyr Enterprise scores 8.3, slightly higher than Qase's 8.2. However, users report that Qase's integrations are more seamless and easier to set up, enhancing overall workflow efficiency.
- Up to 3 users
- 500Mb for attachments
- Test case management
What I love most about QASE is that it is user-friendly and integrates exceptionally easily. Setting it up was easy, and soon became part of our daily operations we couldn’t do without. The test cases become easy to manage through the platforms intuitive...
The app has too many bugs, and it changes too often. It feels like using a beta version of the product. The amount of bugs and issues is way too big for the app that is created by and for testers.
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)
What I love most about QASE is that it is user-friendly and integrates exceptionally easily. Setting it up was easy, and soon became part of our daily operations we couldn’t do without. The test cases become easy to manage through the platforms intuitive...
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...
The app has too many bugs, and it changes too often. It feels like using a beta version of the product. The amount of bugs and issues is way too big for the app that is created by and for testers.
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)
