Jira is quite popular and you probably use it for development anyway, so why not have it integrated? Zephyr, a Jira plugin, is a popular and proven choice among the many options on the market. But can it keep up with a dedicated test management solution like aqua?
aqua offers free AI-enhanced testing
aqua keeps on-premise
aqua has better reporting
AI in test management is moving fast, so baseline features are no longer enough. Here is what a well-developed AI-powered solution should offer:
Independent test management vendors control their own feature roadmap. This makes adopting newer AI capabilities far more practical than it is for Jira-dependent tools, which rely on Atlassian to lead development. aqua’s AI Copilot reads your project context and understands your test suite. At the same time, Zephyr’s SmartBear HaloAI, introduced in 2024, adds test step suggestions and no-code automation on Standard and Advanced tiers. Its scope, however, stays within automation workflows rather than broader QA analysis, such requirements-based generation.
Test management is the core reason to compare these tools. Beyond creating and running tests, look for traceability, compliance logging, and flexible organisation:
Zephyr now offers cross-project hierarchical libraries, versioning, parameters, and BDD integrations, along with 70+ out-of-the-box reports. Test organisation remains constrained by Jira, however. Configurable QA workflows and shared views require native Jira support that does not exist, so neither feature is available in Zephyr. aqua provides both, and also includes full item change history, change reversal, and shared test steps as part of its dedicated QA platform.
Most QA teams rely on third-party tools built up over many years. Native integrations and REST API access are essential to avoid being dependent on the vendor for every connection:
Both platforms take the third-party integration route. Zephyr has expanded its CI/CD coverage to include Jenkins, Bitbucket, GitHub, CircleCI, and Bamboo. On the testing framework side, it supports JUnit, TestNG, Selenium, Cucumber, Robot Framework, Appium, and NUnit. aqua offers a wider native testing tool set, covering Selenium, UFT, JMeter, SoapUI, Ranorex, and database connectors for MSSQL and Oracle. It also includes the Capture bug reporting tool, which Zephyr does not offer natively. Both platforms provide REST API for custom connections.
Pricing structures vary widely. Look beyond the headline number for hidden costs and licence flexibility:
Both platforms offer monthly and annual billing with no setup costs. The significant difference lies in Zephyr’s requirement for an active Jira licence for every user. Pricing tiers are based on total Jira user count rather than actual testers, meaning teams pay for users who never open Zephyr at all. aqua offers free Guest licences for read-only access. It also provides Scout licences at ā¬5/month for manual testers, keeping costs lower for teams with mixed user types.
Deployment flexibility matters, especially in regulated industries where on-premise or private cloud is non-negotiable:
aqua supports Cloud, On-Premise, and custom deployment on any Azure data centre. Zephyr offers Atlassian Cloud and Atlassian Data Center for on-premise deployments. Atlassian has, however, announced Data Center retirement by March 2029. For teams with strict data residency requirements or long-term on-premise plans, this makes Zephyr’s roadmap a relevant risk to factor into procurement decisions.
Good dashboards serve both QA teams and wider stakeholders. Data flexibility and proactive alerts separate basic implementations from more capable ones:
Zephyr provides 70+ cross-project dashboard gadgets covering execution status, cycle progress, and traceability. This is a significant upgrade from earlier versions, though data access remains limited to what Jira exposes. aqua allows use of any workspace data in dashboards. It also adds KPI alerts that notify teams automatically when a metric deviates from a defined threshold, removing the need for manual checks that Zephyr does not support.
Reporting serves both internal teams and external stakeholders. The best tools combine ready-made templates with deep customisation options:
aqua’s Report Wizard supports any data source and allows external imagery, scripts, and parametrisation. This makes it suitable for complex stakeholder reporting that goes beyond standard QA metrics. Zephyr has expanded to 70+ out-of-the-box reports covering execution status, cycle progress, defect summaries, and coverage. These work well for standard needs. Custom layouts, external data, and scripting are not available, so teams with complex reporting requirements will find the options limited.
Precise user management becomes critical across multiple projects or when working with external teams and crowd testers:
Both platforms offer comparable permission granularity, including custom roles and individual user permissions with QA-specific access controls. SSO is available on both platforms. aqua supports SAML and LDAP directly, while Zephyr inherits SSO options from Atlassian’s identity management infrastructure.
A unified ALM platform reduces tool sprawl and licence costs. Worth considering if your team needs more than test management alone:
aqua handles the full product lifecycle natively as a self-contained platform, covering requirements, tests, defects, and project management without external dependencies. Zephyr provides the QA layer within Jira’s broader ecosystem. Defect management, requirements management, and project management are all handled through Jira rather than Zephyr itself, making the full ALM picture dependent on the Atlassian stack.
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 fact that its interface has a fairly simple and straightforward design is excellent for us to use without any problems, the fact that it is not necessary to be an expert programming to use it is also quite practical when making your use. There are many errors that can affect the performance and performance of the application. It is enough to report to the customer service team and they quickly solve it, however I still believe that they should work better to prevent one from noticing that type of failure.ā
Federico D.
Software Development Engineer at an Enterprise (>1000 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
āBulk editing of test scripts isn't always the easiest. Can clutter Jira without sufficient configuration knowledge of Jira.ā
Liz H.
Test Manager at a small business (<50 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 dislike how hard it is to import multiple tests. The importer into Jira is inconsistent and not user friendly. I never feel confident that it will import the first time I try it.ā
A G2 reviewer
mid-sized Retail company (50ā1000 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 fact that its interface has a fairly simple and straightforward design is excellent for us to use without any problems, the fact that it is not necessary to be an expert programming to use it is also quite practical when making your use. There are many errors that can affect the performance and performance of the application. It is enough to report to the customer service team and they quickly solve it, however I still believe that they should work better to prevent one from noticing that type of failure.ā
Federico D.
Software Development Engineer at an Enterprise (>1000 emp.)
āBulk editing of test scripts isn't always the easiest. Can clutter Jira without sufficient configuration knowledge of Jira.ā
Liz H.
Test Manager at a small business (<50 emp.)
āI dislike how hard it is to import multiple tests. The importer into Jira is inconsistent and not user friendly. I never feel confident that it will import the first time I try it.ā
A G2 reviewer
mid-sized Retail company (50ā1000 emp.)
aqua works standalone or as a Jira plugin with no additional licence costs. Zephyr requires Jira for all users and has matured with HaloAI automation, expanded integrations, and 70+ reports, though the Jira dependency affects licensing costs and on-premise continuity beyond 2029. Teams already in the Atlassian ecosystem may find Zephyr a practical fit. Teams needing independent deployment, free read-only licences, or long-term on-premise support will find aqua better suited.
aqua is a standalone platform that also works as a Jira plugin, while Zephyr requires Jira and cannot function independently. aqua offers broader AI capabilities, free Guest licences, and flexible deployment including custom Azure cloud and continued on-premise support with no announced retirement.
Both include AI, but with different scope. aqua’s Copilot reads your workspace to generate tests from requirements. Zephyr’s HaloAI, available on Standard and Advanced tiers, focuses on test step suggestions and converting manual tests to automated ones without scripting.
aqua’s Report Wizard supports any data source, external imagery, scripts, and parametrisation. Zephyr offers 70+ template reports covering standard QA metrics, but does not support custom layouts or data outside the Jira model.
aqua integrates natively with Selenium, Jenkins, UFT, JMeter, SoapUI, Ranorex, and database connectors for MSSQL and Oracle, plus REST API. Zephyr supports Jenkins, Bitbucket, GitHub, CircleCI, and Bamboo for CI/CD and Selenium, JUnit, TestNG, Cucumber, Robot Framework, Appium, and NUnit for test frameworks, plus REST API.