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

CrossBrowserTesting vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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 CrossBrowserTesting is 0.7%, down from 1.1% 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

Michael Hutchison - PeerSpot reviewer
Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems
The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.
Antonio Oteri - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."
"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing."
"Good use in Agile workshops, where the person needs to conceptualize the tests before the developer provides the complete application interface."
"I face no challenges or stability issues."
"The reporting is really nice."
"The solution can be deployed in DevOps and ERP environments like Oracle Fusion. It accelerates testing with the libraries. The product incorporates libraries and is more sensitive to the scans."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
 

Cons

"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect. That would be like the next step."
"I would like to see something in terms of AI capabilities."
"It would be of great help if they can fix the loading or performance issues. Sometimes, when I create the test case folder and test cases, it feels like it has loading or performance issues. When passing the objects, we can't sometimes find the exact element. We need to find out that exact location and just give the path for that, and then it works. In the pipeline, when creating Jenkins, we create the list execution for passing the execution list to the commander. I feel it is a bit late, by a fraction of seconds. I first thought it could be my mistake or a setting issue, but I worked on that, and it's not a mistake or a setting issue."
"It requires some coding customization that requires expertise."
"The solution is expensive."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
"Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"The tool is quite expensive."
"There are different types of licenses: enterprise or professional. The cost varies."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."
"A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros."
"Tricentis Tosca should improve its pricing. It is expensive."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
25%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
12%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 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

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
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 CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.