aqua and Kualitee are modern tools with a fresh look, but they have quite a different feature set. Which one works better for testing? Can you do more than just testing? Find out in just 10 minutes.
aqua offers free AI-enhanced testing
aqua is an ALM solution
aqua has more integrations
AI is a rapidly developing tech, so we will look at cutting-edge tech rather than the baseline. Hereās what you should expect from an AI-powered test management solution:
aqua utilises OpenAI’s GPT language model to generate entire tests and complete drafts. ChatGPT could do that too, but it doesnāt know the context of your software project and canāt analyse your existing tests. Kualitee does not have AI functionality for testing.
Test management is the main reason we are looking at these two tools. You should consider various aspects of handling test cases as well as traceability-minded features. These include:
aqua and Kualitee are both strong test management solutions. Kualitee, however, lacks some essential time-savers for organising QA work. It also does not have workspace-wide logging. This functionality is valuable for any company that cares about transparency and traceability, and it is essential for companies in heavily regulated industries.
Most tools rely on automation via common third-party tools that QA specialists have been using for over a decade. The experience is much better when your test management solution has native integrations for industry-leading tools. REST API support is a must if you do not want to be at the vendorās mercy for integrations.
aqua and Kualitee both rely on third-party solutions for automation. Kualitee has a dedicated section for tests powered by Selenium scripts. aqua, on the other hand, acts like a hub to help you run and store tests from 10 test automation tools.
Tools differ in how much money they request upfront and what scaling looks like. Some criteria here are:
Kualitee and aqua are a close match here. The biggest difference comes in subsidised licences. aqua offers free licences for manual QA, while Kualitee merely charges a reduced fee for Viewer licences.
On-Premise deployment is a must in many industries, yet vendors wonāt explicitly say if they donāt offer it. Depending on your security policies and scale, deploying in a non-vendor Cloud is a beneficial option too.
aqua and Kualitee support On-Premise and Cloud deployment to suit your companyās needs. Both companies sell On-Premise versions as a service rather than offer perpetual licences. The upside is that On-Premise does not carry a hefty five-figure price tag for setup or absurd maintenance fees found in old solutions.
Kualitee, however, does not offer the option of deploying a Cloud workspace on some other server. This option (supported by aqua) strikes a nice balance between security and convenience, and most European companies canāt just host their data in the US. This is a major consideration for a Cloud deployment comparison of aqua and Kualitee testing tools.
QA dashboards serve two vital purposes. They help the QA team track their progress, but they also make other teams aware of potential bottlenecks. At a minimum, you should be able to include any data and share dashboards with the team.
Dashboards have long been a weak point of Kualitee. They improved that in early 2023 by adding new graph types and offering filters to quickly look through data. aqua, however, still has an advantage with better customisation and KPI Alerts that automatically look for anomalies and alert key QA stakeholders.
Reporting is important for both internal and external stakeholders. The goal here is to get what you need with as little or as much effort as possible. When a tool offers both a template library and rich customisation, that is a good start.
Unlike dashboards, reports have seen little progress in Kualitee. You are still restricted to several report types with no customisation at all. The basic reports donāt even make full use of all the data available in Kualitee. aqua has a similar template library but offers full customisation, including adding and manipulating external data.
Precise user management is essential when working on multiple projects and/or working with external specialists. It will also save you a lot of pain from running crowd testing in the same test management solution.
Granular user management is useful even if security is not the biggest concern for your project. Both tools are solid here, but aqua offers per-user permission that Kualitee does not.
This is not a hard requirement, but you may be interested in a test management solution that also handles the entire product lifecycle. This is a great money saver as you need licences from fewer vendors, and the synergy should save you some hours as well.
aqua is a QA-first solution, but it can also be used to handle the entire lifecycle of your product. Kualitee does test management and defect management only: you will need to pay for something else to handle requirements and manage project timelines.
Here are a few things people like and dislike about both tools.
āI was surprised to find such a comprehensive and mature tool for test management in the German market without having taken it seriously beforehand.ā
Jƶrg GroĆmann
Head of Development at Bank 11
āThe user interface is not friendly, but the features are very good. Sometimes it takes time to load, and the page is not responsive. It would be great if adding test cases into the test execution cycle was faster.ā
Marcello M.
Research Assistant at a small business (<50 emp.)
āThe reporting is meaningful and provides a good basis for decisions. After the employees have used aqua, they recognize the added value very quickly.ā
Thomas Haeske
Head of Organisation/IT at Berlin Hyp
āNot user friendly, it's confusing and not always helpful. The audit trail for each defect doesn't do a good job of recording past history and hence, data becomes hard to analyse.ā
Mirza Usama B.
Associate Software Engineer (50-1000 emp.)
āManual test cases are easily automated with aqua. Seamless integration with test automation tools helps here.ā
Jƶrn-Hendrick Sƶrensen
Test Manager at KBA
āI like Defect Management, User Management, and Global Dashboards. I dislike the slowness of the application. Sometimes, it gets slower than the expected behaviour for applications of this kind. ā
Kashif S.
Principal Software Engineer at a small business (<50 emp.)
āI was surprised to find such a comprehensive and mature tool for test management in the German market without having taken it seriously beforehand.ā
Jƶrg GroĆmann
Head of Development at Bank 11
āThe reporting is meaningful and provides a good basis for decisions. After the employees have used aqua, they recognize the added value very quickly.ā
Thomas Haeske
Head of Organisation/IT at Berlin Hyp
āManual test cases are easily automated with aqua. Seamless integration with test automation tools helps here.ā
Jƶrn-Hendrick Sƶrensen
Test Manager at KBA
āThe user interface is not friendly, but the features are very good. Sometimes it takes time to load, and the page is not responsive. It would be great if adding test cases into the test execution cycle was faster.ā
Marcello M.
Research Assistant at a small business (<50 emp.)
āNot user friendly, it's confusing and not always helpful. The audit trail for each defect doesn't do a good job of recording past history and hence, data becomes hard to analyse.ā
Mirza Usama B.
Associate Software Engineer (50-1000 emp.)
āI like Defect Management, User Management, and Global Dashboards. I dislike the slowness of the application. Sometimes, it gets slower than the expected behaviour for applications of this kind. ā
Kashif S.
Principal Software Engineer at a small business (<50 emp.)
aqua is an Enterprise-grade solution that excels in traditional testing, but brings much more. It has AI-powered testing functionality, manages the entire product lifecycle, and comes with advanced reporting. Kualitee holds its own in testing and advertises an attractive price tag, but a QA team would actually pay the same to aqua for a much bigger feature set.