Softwr

Testing · head to head

Percy vs Qase

Percy logo

Percy

Testing

Visual regression testing owned by BrowserStack, with a permanent free tier for low screenshot volume

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Qase logo

Qase

Testing

Test case management with an API first design and a free tier for small teams

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Percy pixel-based diffing generates more false positives from font rendering and anti-aliasing noise than Applitools' AI-based comparison, which trains some teams to start ignoring diff alerts over time.; Qase requirements traceability is shallower than the enterprise incumbents, so proving coverage against a numbered specification takes manual field discipline rather than a built in link.
  • They diverge on capability: Percy covers Screenshot diffing, Qase covers Case repository.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Percy and Qase actually diverge.

Attributes where Percy and Qase differ
AttributePercyQase
Pricing modelFreemium, paid tiers by screenshot volumePer user per month

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), platforms (Web), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Testing).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Percy

  • Screenshot diffing
  • Framework integrations
  • Responsive and cross-browser snapshots
  • Review workflow
  • Build history
  • BrowserStack platform integration

Only in Qase

  • Case repository
  • Test runs and plans
  • Automation reporters
  • Defect linking
  • Public API
  • Requirement and review workflow

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Percy

  • A team already on BrowserStack for device testing that wants to add visual regression without a separate vendor relationshipnot Qase
  • A low-traffic project that can run indefinitely on the 5,000-screenshot free tier without paying anythingnot Qase
  • A team wanting a lower cost per screenshot than Applitools and willing to tolerate more manual false-positive triagenot Qase
  • A Cypress or Playwright test suite adding visual checks without changing its existing test runnernot Qase

Qase

  • A QA lead introducing formal test management with no budget approval yetnot Percy
  • Teams that want manual and automated results in one run history rather than two systemsnot Percy
  • Organisations replacing TestRail on cost after a per seat renewal increasenot Percy
  • Small teams needing exportable evidence of what was tested for a customer or auditornot Percy

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Percy

  • Pixel-based diffing generates more false positives from font rendering and anti-aliasing noise than Applitools' AI-based comparison, which trains some teams to start ignoring diff alerts over time.
  • It is billed separately from core BrowserStack device testing, and stacking Percy with other BrowserStack modules such as Accessibility Testing materially increases total contract value beyond the headline device testing price.
  • Paid tier pricing above the free tier is not transparently published as a fixed number, requiring a quote to know actual cost at scale.
  • The free tier's 5,000-screenshot cap is easy to exceed for any team running visual tests across multiple browsers and viewports on every commit, pushing many active projects into a paid tier faster than the free number suggests.
  • As part of a larger acquired portfolio, Percy's roadmap priority within BrowserStack's broader product strategy is less certain than it would be as a standalone company's sole focus.

Qase

  • Requirements traceability is shallower than the enterprise incumbents, so proving coverage against a numbered specification takes manual field discipline rather than a built in link.
  • It is a small vendor relative to Atlassian and Idera, and test management systems accumulate years of history, so continuity risk deserves weighing against the price saving.
  • The Jira integration is a link between two products rather than an application inside Jira, so teams that live entirely in Jira will still context switch, which is exactly what Zephyr avoids.
  • Reporting is adequate for a team and thin for a programme; consolidated quality metrics across many projects usually end up rebuilt in a BI tool.
  • Automation reporters cover the common runners well but anything unusual falls to the API, meaning someone has to build and maintain that integration.

Pricing, plan by plan

Percy

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 5,000 screenshots a month
    • Unlimited users and projects
    • 30-day build history
  • Percy$undefined/month
    • Priced by screenshot volume above the free tier
    • Sold separately from core BrowserStack device testing plans
    • Get a current quote before assuming bundled pricing with other BrowserStack products

Qase

Free
  • Free$undefined/month
    • Small user limit with core case management and runs
    • Enough for a two or three person team to work in permanently
  • Paid tiers$undefined/month
    • Published per user monthly pricing rising with integrations, custom fields and reporting depth
    • Cheaper per seat than the established test management incumbents at comparable tiers

Which should you pick?

Choose Percy if

  • You need screenshot diffing.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want framework integrations.
Percy review

Choose Qase if

  • You need case repository.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want test runs and plans.
Qase review

Questions people ask

Is Percy or Qase better?
Neither clearly leads. Percy starts at Free and Qase at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Percy or Qase?
Percy starts at Free and Qase at Free.
Does Percy or Qase run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
Can I use Percy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Percy best used for?
Percy is most often used for a team already on browserstack for device testing that wants to add visual regression without a separate vendor relationship, a low-traffic project that can run indefinitely on the 5,000-screenshot free tier without paying anything, a team wanting a lower cost per screenshot than applitools and willing to tolerate more manual false-positive triage, a cypress or playwright test suite adding visual checks without changing its existing test runner. Of those, a team already on browserstack for device testing that wants to add visual regression without a separate vendor relationship and a low-traffic project that can run indefinitely on the 5,000-screenshot free tier without paying anything are not what Qase is typically brought in for.
What can Percy do that Qase cannot?
Percy covers Screenshot diffing, Framework integrations, Responsive and cross-browser snapshots, Review workflow. Qase covers Case repository, Test runs and plans, Automation reporters, Defect linking.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Percy: Is Percy free?

Yes for up to 5,000 screenshots a month with unlimited users and projects; beyond that it is a paid, quote-priced module.

Qase: Can the free tier be used indefinitely?

Yes, within its user limit. It is a genuine free tier rather than a trial.

Percy: Is Percy included if I already pay for BrowserStack device testing?

No, it is billed separately by screenshot volume, not bundled into core device testing plans.

Qase: Does it run tests?

No. It records what was run and what happened. Execution stays with your framework or your testers.

Percy: How does it compare to Applitools?

Percy uses pixel-based diffing, which is generally cheaper per screenshot but produces more false positives than Applitools' AI-based perceptual comparison.

Qase: How hard is migrating from TestRail?

Case import is straightforward; run history and custom field mappings are the part that takes time.

Share

Related pages

More on Percy

More on Qase

Keep looking

Other head to heads