Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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 (9th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

RS
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.
PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features
The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.

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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"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."
"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."
"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."
"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
 

Cons

"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."
"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 is take about 5-10 minutes."
"It needs better integration with JIRA."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."
"A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software, particularly during upstream testing, before system and unit testing."
"They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies."
"Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved."
"What needs to be improved in Tricentis Tosca is its centralized repository mechanism because it's not as flexible. The repository in the solution where you store the data and the script for test automation is quite an old-fashioned mechanism that could be improved."
"It can be quite expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is rather expensive for those that have many users."
"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 tool is expensive. It has become overpriced, especially after Tricentis Tosca grew as a company. Initially, we bought a license with an annual support fee, which wasn't too expensive. However, they changed the model, and now we have to purchase a license yearly, which has become quite costly."
"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"It is expensive."
"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."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the pricing a ten. The licensing model is based on a yearly basis."
"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."
"We hired a consultant to figure out all the tools in our company and how they fit in our company before we purchased the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
30%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
4%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
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 slig...
What needs improvement with Adaptavist Test Management for Jira?
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 manua...
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 do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
 

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 Adaptavist Test Management for Jira vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.