No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Adaptavist Test Management ...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (20th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st), Functional Testing Tools (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

RS
Director of Product at Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Has dashboard and reporting features that help us identify and address red flags
I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable. One challenge with integrating Adaptavist Test Management for Jira into workflows is ensuring it accurately tags and incorporates all relevant stories and epics. Sometimes, it’s unclear if the tool considers all dependencies and backlog items, which can affect how risks are assessed. However, it sometimes seems to miss this high-level perspective, which can be a limitation based on how the product is designed. This has been a concern for those who use it regularly, although I don’t manage these aspects personally.
AKSHAYRATHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior engineer at Nagarro
End-to-end regression automation has accelerated delivery and now secures complex test data
I think Tosca can be improved, particularly in AI capabilities because right now Tosca does not have any strong API capabilities. It has some AI features in the newer version, but many organizations have not adopted these due to version-specific problems, as some are still using older versions. From an AI point of view, they can enhance reliability since the world is moving towards AI, and every tool must be integrated. While Tosca has made attempts, I have not used them and they are not widely adopted, so they are stuck in the testing phase in my organization. I would also mention that while I am currently using Tosca Mobile, the loading part and connectivity issues need improvement. They should better integrate AI features that are already present but not widely used across many organizations. Reliability on the AI aspect needs enhancement for practical application. From the perspective of governance and security, I believe Tosca can develop its own LLM or leverage third-party LLMs while maintaining security and risk management regarding client data. Many companies prefer using Tosca due to data security, which is crucial. An in-house LLM could significantly enhance its debugging power and provide helpful solutions upon test case failure.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"Our software development process primarily uses Adaptive Test Management for Jira to monitor real-time risks across all stories and sprint planning. Additionally, we use it to create action plans for high-priority risks."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"My impression of the stability is very positive."
"Test Management for Jira provides a repository for our test cases."
"The program is very stable, and that is why we have so much success with it."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the Salesforce scanning. There are two scanning for Salesforce applications. There is Salesforce scanning and normal application scanning. Object identification has been really useful in Tricentis Tosca."
"The most important feature is its ability to support the technical automation of specific clients that we cannot use with other tools."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it."
"We've found TBox to be valuable for scanning applications and automating test cases."
"Scriptless SW QA automation provides a very quick on ramp to test automation with little maintenance."
"We decided to go with Testsuite because you can integrate manual test cases and you can see the reports in a nice way and see how the test case is going in the requirement section."
 

Cons

"Capability for scalability is basic, it's not as sophisticated as I would like."
"Something that needs to improve is the model of the licensing. For instance, if you have two packs from two servers, you need to buy two licenses."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr it takes about 5-10 minutes."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"I would like to see some improvements in Adaptive Test Management for Jira. First, having a recommendation engine or feature that guides handling risks more intuitively rather than relying on manual processes would be helpful. Second, enhancing the connectivity with third-party tools like Teams or Slack would be valuable."
"The product's test case management functionality needs enhancement."
"Some issues with stability, but those are minor errors."
"Running the regression – if multiple lists are executed at once or if a list contains 200+ tests, it’s a pain to stop the execution."
"The issue is that even though the components are tightly integrated, object identification can be quite slow, sometimes taking five to ten seconds."
"I would like a better user interface."
"The solution should work to try to lessen the cost of the solution. Right now, using it is costly for companies such as ours."
"With the license stability, we have had a lot of issues. There were many interruptions to the connection and it took two-three weeks and we installed the license ourselves."
"The initial setup was complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is a bit expensive, considering the kind of risk analysis and visibility we want, given that it's built on top of the Jira platform and other Atlassian products. It's priced slightly higher than similar products, maybe five to ten percent more."
"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven."
"In terms of the licensing costs for Tricentis Tosca, we are spending more or less $70,000 per year. We have a very complex mechanism because there are some business users and some BI users, so the licensing structure is not simple, but support is included."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"Pricing could be better."
"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."
"The licensing cost for Tricentis Tosca is expensive. It has multiple features, but to use all of its features, you have to pay for additional licenses."
"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."
"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise75
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis Tosca?
The pricing for Tricentis Tosca is extremely high, and I rate it as ten in terms of expense. It is really pricey in the market, making it more suitable for large enterprises rather than small or me...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, John Lewis, Trip Advisor, Netgear,  Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Sapient
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Regression Testing Tools. Updated: July 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.