Compare Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise 
- Users report that Tricentis qTest excels in its Test Feedback feature, scoring an impressive 9.2, which reviewers mention provides comprehensive insights into test results and facilitates better decision-making.
- Reviewers mention that Zephyr Enterprise shines in Reporting, achieving a score of 9.2, with users highlighting its ability to generate detailed and customizable reports that enhance visibility into testing progress.
- G2 users indicate that Tricentis qTest's Test Repository feature is highly rated at 8.9, with users appreciating its organized structure that allows for easy access and management of test cases.
- Users on G2 report that Zephyr Enterprise offers superior Test Diversity, scoring 8.9, which reviewers say allows for a broader range of testing types and methodologies, catering to various project needs.
- Reviewers mention that Tricentis qTest's Automation Organization feature is rated at 9.3, with users praising its ability to streamline automated testing processes and improve overall efficiency.
- Users say that while both products have strong Version Control features, Zephyr Enterprise's score of 8.8 is slightly higher, with reviewers noting its effectiveness in managing test versions and ensuring consistency across testing efforts.
The Explorer tool to record exploratory testing sessions. I also like the ability to share test cases between projects.
Frequent production issues leave all our users blocked. Poor follow-up on explaining the root cause of outages. No clear way to report functionality gaps and enhancement requests.
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)
The Explorer tool to record exploratory testing sessions. I also like the ability to share test cases between projects.
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...
Frequent production issues leave all our users blocked. Poor follow-up on explaining the root cause of outages. No clear way to report functionality gaps and enhancement requests.
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)
