BrowserStack vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

BrowserStack and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 20.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 109 Tricentis Tosca reviews

14,913 Views
8,247 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Tricentis Tosca and BrowserStack both compete in the test automation space. BrowserStack seems to have an advantage due to its broader device testing capabilities and cost-effectiveness for physical device alternatives.

Features: Tricentis Tosca offers scriptless automation, a model-based approach, and extensive technology support, including SAP and Oracle Apps. BrowserStack provides cross-browser and cross-device testing, manual testing capabilities with detailed logs, and a wide selection of devices for testing.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis Tosca needs to enhance upgrades for fewer disruptions, improve license management, and offer better visualization and integration with non-GUI apps. BrowserStack could improve integration with other frameworks, enhance stability, and address occasional connectivity issues.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca predominantly supports on-premises, hybrid, and public cloud environments. Its customer service receives mixed reviews. BrowserStack, accessible via public and private clouds, offers quick and efficient support, earning praise for its responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca's high pricing can be a barrier for smaller companies, though it provides significant ROI for long-term projects. BrowserStack, while still seen as costly by some, offers competitive pricing compared to physical test labs, providing ROI through testing efficiencies across numerous devices.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 peers since 2012

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

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

109

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st), Test Automation Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 20.4%, up from 16.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Antonio Oteri

IT Telecom Quality Senior Tester at TIM

Ability to automate tests across various platforms and simplifies test creation

From what I've seen with my colleagues who make the software selection, the prices for this software in Brazil are too expensive to be applied to anything but huge customers. I'm surprised because I was in charge of planning and control at the company before, when there was a manager there. Normally, the company has structural licenses that are based on the company they are selling to. I see that these companies cannot spend this money on Tricentis. I think Tosca is losing this type of market. They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies. The same happened in the past with SAP, which changed its policy and also made licenses for low.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."

"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."

"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."

"The integration is very good."

"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."

"I like that it offers full device capability."

"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."

"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."

More BrowserStack pros

"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."

"What I find valuable is that Tricentis is always refining the test methodology. They listen to feedback from the analysts about what the testing tool should do, and then Tricentis always implements it. So all the necessary testing functions are already implemented in their tools."

"Compared to other tools we have been looking at, you don't have to be a programmer to operate it, though it helps. It also a product that can be used by business people."

"I like how the modules are set up, particularly how you can use the screens you're automating. This automation helps save both time and money because we use less test capacity regarding personnel."

"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."

"It's been very helpful to have connectivity with mobile. The tool also identifies some of the actual changes from the recordings on the actual testing suite. That is something that I really like."

"The platform's most valuable feature is model-based testing, which is effective for test case design and optimization."

"The use of automation is most valuable."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."

"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."

"We are struggling to do local testing."

"The solution is slow."

"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."

"There is room for improvement in pricing."

"We had some execution issues."

More BrowserStack cons

"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."

"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."

"They need to improve on the reports after the execution of automation tests, since all the current organizations are looking for detailed graphical reports."

"Technical support used to be better. It is now a bit difficult to reach out compared to previous experiences."

"Primarily I'm dealing with customers looking for a cheap solution, and they are willing to try open-source automation solutions. So from this perspective, the price of Tosca is not as competitive."

"The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars."

"In terms of areas for improvement, Tricentis has a variety of tools, even its test management tool called qTest. Tricentis Tosca does have integration with different Tricentis tools, but the integration is geared towards a larger organization perspective. For very small organizations that have minimal licenses, the integration needs to be improvised. For example, I belong to a smaller organization that has only one license, so the capability that the tool provides for integration isn't sufficient because my company needs to have separate workspaces. When Tricentis Tosca is going to be running, it is going to use that license, but my company wants another separate workspace to record, relay, and test. This is what my team has been struggling with, and the mechanism is probably there, but that needs more time and investigation, so I can't say that I'm one hundred percent certain that Tricentis Tosca, in terms of integration for a smaller organization is insufficient. Another area for improvement is that Tricentis Tosca is currently just a Windows-based tool which affects the market because nowadays, Windows isn't the only operating system, for example, there's also Apple or IOS that's moving much faster than Windows."

"The solution is expensive."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"The price is fine."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"We have around 200 [concurrent] licenses and the cost around $1.4 million a year."

"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."

"Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked."

"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."

"I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it."

"Tricentis Tosca should improve its pricing. It is expensive."

"The tool is quite expensive."

"Pricing could be better."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 34% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 19% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

Katalon Studio vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 7% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

March 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

March 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Overview

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca is primarily leveraged for test automation across web, SAP, API, and mainframe applications, offering robust support for both regression and functional testing.

Tricentis Tosca's test automation capabilities extend to front-end and back-end testing, including processes like RPA and UI-based regression tests on Microsoft Windows. It supports Agile environments with multiple applications, enabling Salesforce automation, API endpoints, and end-to-end automation workflows. Tosca caters to diverse testing needs, integrating well with tools like Jenkins and Bamboo, although upgrades and customizations present challenges. Licensing costs and performance issues during loading and scanning are concerns, along with substantial learning curves for new users. Enhanced AI features and better reporting are on users' wishlist.

What are the key features of Tricentis Tosca?

Tosca BI: Ensures data integrity and accuracy in business intelligence testing
Tosca Commander: Centralized control for easy test management and maintenance
Model-Based Test Automation: Facilitates test creation without scripting
Integration Capabilities: Works seamlessly with Jenkins and Bamboo for CI/CD
Diverse Application Support: Compatible with mobile, web, APIs, and SAP
Scriptless Nature: Simplifies usage and reduces maintenance efforts

What benefits should users consider?

Enhanced Automation: Streamlines testing processes, saving time and resources
Scalability: Adapts to growing demands within an organization
Test Management: Centralized control enhances efficiency and oversight
Ease of Use: Scriptless approach lowers the barrier to entry for users

Tricentis Tosca is implemented across various industries, serving sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail with test automation solutions to ensure application quality and reliability. Agile teams in these industries benefit from its multi-application support and ability to manage complex end-to-end testing workflows. The tool's integration capabilities are particularly useful in environments that rely on CI/CD pipelines, ensuring continuous testing and quick feedback loops.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

February 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.