BOOK A DEMO
START FOR FREE
icon icon
BOOK A DEMO
TRY 30 DAYS FREE
aqua vs Qase

Can the hip tool keep up?

Launched in late 2020, Qase is the latest test management solution to get notable traction. It had a very modern interface and surprisingly mature UX from day 1. Still, what exactly do they lack that an established TMS has? Find out, section by section, in just 10 minutes.

Key differences between aqua and Qase

aqua brings free AI-enhanced testing

aqua offers On-Premise

Qase lacks reporting

How we compare

Key differences between aqua and Qase

AI

AI is a rapidly developing tech, so we will look at cutting-edge tech rather than the baseline. Here’s what you should expect from an AI-powered test management solution:

  • Analyse your workspace to get QA context
  • Create test cases, defects, and even requirements from a plain text description
  • Complete test case drafts
  • Prioritise tests
  • Remove duplicate tests and defects

aqua started adapting the algorithm behind ChatGPT to QA needs before ChatGPT was even revealed. Almost a year later, you can not only generate new tests but also update them after changing a requirement. Qase barely launched an early beta, which does not read the context of your project and has strict bandwidth requirements.

Qase logo
Generate entire tests with AI
Generate small tests only (early beta)
Auto-train AI Copilot with your tests
Not Available
Update tests after requirement change
Not Available
Prioritise tests
Not Available
Remove duplicates
Not Available
Text-to-speech AI tests
Not Available
AI chatbot for ideas and validation
Not Available
Generate entire tests with AI
Auto-train AI Copilot with your tests
Update tests after requirement change
Prioritise tests
Remove duplicates
Text-to-speech AI tests
AI chatbot for ideas and validation
Qase logo
Generate small tests only (early beta)
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available

Verdict: aqua wins by bigger and wider AI functionality

Try aqua AI

Test management

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:

  • Create, execute, share, and manage test cases in the workspace
  • Group tests into test scenarios, segment them into folders, assign labels
  • Quickly navigate the test suite, apply filters, use individual and shared views
  • See the entire execution history for a test case
  • Store a full log of changes for compliance
  • Visualise requirements coverage and dependencies between requirements, test cases, and defects

aqua and Qase both offer industry-leading test management experience. You can create tests, group them, designate shared test steps, and track changes to items. Qase, however, lacks views and workflows, which are major time savers for projects of any scale.

Qase logo
  • Test cases, test scenarios, bulk test edits, custom fields
  • Execution history
  • Quick navigation & filters
  • Item change history
Views
Not Available
Workflows
Not Available
Shared views
Not Available
Qase logo
  • Test cases, test scenarios, bulk test edits, custom fields
  • Execution history
  • Quick navigation & filters
  • Item change history
Views
Workflows
Shared views
Qase logo
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Verdict: aqua wins by views and workflows

Integrations

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 vendor’s mercy for integrations.

  • First-party framework automation or third-party integrations with test automation tools
  • Native third-party integrations: Selenium, Jenkins, JMeter, SoapUI, Ranorex
  • Jira integration and/or Jira plugin
  • REST API support for integrating any tool

Qase and aqua take different approaches to test automation. Qase suggests that you work with open-source frameworks like Cucumber, Cypress, and Playwright to create tests that will be reported into your workspace. aqua has integrations with leading test automation solutions like JMeter, SoapUI, and Ranorex. With both vendors, you can also use the REST API to connect any tool you like.

Qase logo
  • REST API
  • Jira integration
Jira real-time project sync
Not Available
Selenium, Jenkins, UFT, JMeter, SoapUI, Ranorex, Database MSSQL, Database Oracle for test automation
JavaScript, Java, Python-based frameworks for test automation
Bug recording and reporting tool Capture
No native bug reporting integration
Not Available
Various issue trackers
Qase logo
  • REST API
  • Jira integration
Jira real-time project sync
Selenium, Jenkins, UFT, JMeter, SoapUI, Ranorex, Database MSSQL, Database Oracle for test automation
Bug recording and reporting tool Capture
Not Available
Qase logo
Not Available
JavaScript, Java, Python-based frameworks for test automation
No native bug reporting integration
Various issue trackers
Verdict: aqua wins by extra native QA integrations

Pricing flexibility

Tools differ in how much money they request upfront and what scaling looks like. Some criteria here are:

  • Extra functionality beyond test management
  • Transparent pricing without locking essential features behind the most expensive plans
  • Custom enterprise plan
  • Price-to-volume scaling that suits your team size
  • No exorbitant setup and/or maintenance fee
  • Free licences for guests / non-tech specialists / manual testers

Qase has a lot of plans that are slightly obscure. Most companies would need the Business plan to have native test case review functionality as well as access restrictions. Both plans are billed annually. Qase pricing options, however, can’t compete with aqua’s universal pricing. Smaller teams often mean a lot of manual testers, and aqua offers free licences for them. These people will benefit from proper QA workflows and access relevant information only.

Qase logo
  • Feature requests
  • Custom Enterprise plan
Free licences for manual testing
Full price licences only
Qase logo
  • Feature requests
  • Custom Enterprise plan
Free licences for manual testing
Qase logo
Full price licences only

Verdict: aqua wins by free licences

Try aqua for free

Deployment Models

On-Premise deployment is a must in many industries, yet vendors won’t explicitly say if they don’t offer it. Depending on your security policies and scale, deploying in a non-vendor Cloud is a beneficial option too.

  • Vendor Cloud
  • External Cloud: AWS, Azure, etc.
  • On-Premise

Qase has never expressed interest in on-premise deployment, and they still do not support it. On the other hand, aqua has been offering On-Premise since day 1 and boasts a portfolio of clients that rely on it. If vendor Cloud does not work for you, both aqua and Qase can host your workspaces on an isolated server.

Qase logo
On-Premise
Not available
GDPR-compliant aqua-hosted German Cloud
Qase-hosted US Cloud
Isolated Enterprise Custom Cloud (Any Azure data centre)
Isolated Enterprise Custom Cloud
On-Premise
GDPR-compliant aqua-hosted German Cloud
Isolated Enterprise Custom Cloud (Any Azure data centre)
Qase logo
Not available
Qase-hosted US Cloud
Isolated Enterprise Custom Cloud
Verdict: aqua wins by offering On-Premise

Dashboards

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.

  • Use all data of the workspace
  • Create private and shared dashboards
  • Choose between various types of graphs
  • Set up KPI/values alerts that arrive as email/app notifications

Qase’s dashboards are sufficient. You can organise a good number of widgets that visualise key metrics. aqua goes wider by allowing you to display any data from the workspace. It also offers KPI Alerts that track data on the dashboards and notify you when a metric goes below or above the number that you find concerning.

Qase logo
Any data
23 widgets
KPI Alerts
No KPI Alerts
Any data
KPI Alerts
Qase logo
23 widgets
No KPI Alerts
Verdict: aqua wins by customisation and KPI Alerts

Reporting

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.

  • Access vendor-provided template library
  • Create custom layouts and save them
  • Use and transform any data
  • Apply text & image formatting
  • Add external data and imagery
  • Employ scripts and parametrisation to auto-update reports

Qase does not have dedicated reports that go beyond dashboard widgets. On the other hand, aqua brings highly customised reports that can mix dashboards, pivot tables, data that is auto-transformed by scripts, and even any other texts or images you add. Reports can be easily shared with outside parties as well.

Qase logo
Report templates
Not available
Custom reports
Not available
External sharing
Not available
Any data
Not available
Text & image formatting
Not available
Drag-and-drop
Not available
External text & imagery
Not available
Diagrams
Not available
Pivot tables
Not available
Scripts
Not available
Parametrisation
Not available
Report templates
Custom reports
External sharing
Any data
Text & image formatting
Drag-and-drop
External text & imagery
Diagrams
Pivot tables
Scripts
Parametrisation
Qase logo
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Verdict: aqua wins by offering custom reports

User management

Qase’s user management is a little unpleasant. There are only 3 basic roles out of the box. If you want anything more granular, you need to go up to the Business plan. There are no per user permissions either.

  • Set default roles
  • Create custom roles
  • Apply per-user permissions
  • Authenticate users via SSO

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 Qase does not.

Qase logo
  • SSO
  • Default user roles
Custom roles for all customers
Custom roles for Business & Enterprise plans
Individual permissions
Role permissions only
Qase logo
  • SSO
  • Default user roles
Custom roles for all customers
Individual permissions
Qase logo
Custom roles for Business & Enterprise plans
Role permissions only
Verdict: aqua wins by individual role permissions

ALM

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.

  • Test case management
  • Requirements management
  • Defect management
  • Project management

aqua and Qase are both QA-first solutions that can also handle the entire product lifecycle. You can keep Jira if your devs request so, but new projects and small teams would appreciate not paying for extra tools.

Qase logo
  • Test case management
  • Defect management
  • Requirements management
  • Project management
Qase logo
  • Test case management
  • Defect management
  • Requirements management
  • Project management
Details verdict icon: Tie
Verdict: Tie

What people say

Here are a few things people like and dislike about both tools.

Qase logo
star star star star star

“I was surprised to find such a comprehensive and mature tool for test management in the German market without having taken it seriously beforehand.”

Jörg Großmann

Head of Development at Bank 11

star star star

“The main thing which got us using Qase was their UX, which is way more convenient to use than most of the competition. There is room for improvement, such as reporting — especially cross-team reporting and building holistic views on how all projects are doing across the company”.

Mikko V.

Enterprise (>1,000 emp.)

star star star star star

“The reporting is meaningful and provides a good basis for decisions. After the employees have used aqua, they recognize the added value very quickly.”

Thomas Haeske

Head of Organisation/IT at Berlin Hyp

star star star

“There is one area where I feel Qase could improve: the process of writing test steps for similar cases. While the platform provides some tools to make this easier, writing out the same steps for multiple cases with similar characteristics can still be quite time-consuming and tedious“.

Luka C.

Small business (<50 emp.)

star star star star star

“Manual test cases are easily automated with aqua. Seamless integration with test automation tools helps here.”

Jörn-Hendrick Sörensen

Test Manager at KBA

star star star

“There is a distinct lack of filters available on a test run level and on a test case level, e.g.: 1. Filter only the test runs which contain failing tests among thousands of test runs (triggered by automation) 2. Filter out test cases that no longer exist in the code (we deprecated and old feature and therefore removed the tests)”

Lee W.

Small business (<50 emp.)

star star star star star

“I was surprised to find such a comprehensive and mature tool for test management in the German market without having taken it seriously beforehand.”

Jörg Großmann

Head of Development at Bank 11

star star star star star

“The reporting is meaningful and provides a good basis for decisions. After the employees have used aqua, they recognize the added value very quickly.”

Thomas Haeske

Head of Organisation/IT at Berlin Hyp

star star star star star

“Manual test cases are easily automated with aqua. Seamless integration with test automation tools helps here.”

Jörn-Hendrick Sörensen

Test Manager at KBA

Qase logo
star star star

“The main thing which got us using Qase was their UX, which is way more convenient to use than most of the competition. There is room for improvement, such as reporting — especially cross-team reporting and building holistic views on how all projects are doing across the company”.

Mikko V.

Enterprise (>1,000 emp.)

star star star

“There is one area where I feel Qase could improve: the process of writing test steps for similar cases. While the platform provides some tools to make this easier, writing out the same steps for multiple cases with similar characteristics can still be quite time-consuming and tedious“.

Luka C.

Small business (<50 emp.)

star star star

“There is a distinct lack of filters available on a test run level and on a test case level, e.g.: 1. Filter only the test runs which contain failing tests among thousands of test runs (triggered by automation) 2. Filter out test cases that no longer exist in the code (we deprecated and old feature and therefore removed the tests)”

Lee W.

Small business (<50 emp.)

Final verdict

aqua is both an established Enterprise-grade solution and a pioneer of AI testing. Qase is a fast climber in the market, but they barely released AI functionality and need more time to deliver general efficiency features. Despite a number of clear feature advantages, aqua competes and often beats Qase on price as well.

Qase logo
Bleeding-edge AI-powered functionality
Early beta AI tests without workspace context
10+ automated testing integrations & REST API
Automation frameworks & REST API
Views & workflows
Not available
Individual permissions
Upselling to role permissions only
On-Premise & Cloud
Cloud only
Industry-leading reporting
Not available
Free licences for manual QA
Not available
Monthly billing
Annual billing
Bleeding-edge AI-powered functionality
10+ automated testing integrations & REST API
Views & workflows
Individual permissions
On-Premise & Cloud
Industry-leading reporting
Free licences for manual QA
Monthly billing
Qase logo
Early beta AI tests without workspace context
Automation frameworks & REST API
Not available
Upselling to role permissions only
Cloud only
Not available
Not available
Annual billing

Winner

Try aqua for free
Home » aqua vs Qase: can the hip tool keep up?