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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 14, 2025

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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
29th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 0.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 18.9%, up from 17.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
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

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority."
"The scriptless automation tool is one of the important features."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
"The most valuable feature is being able to create a test case by recording some scenarios and then leasing that task case to other scenarios."
"Tosca can go through platforms to make end-to-end testing across CRM, billing, provisioning, order management flow, and databases to check for errors."
"We can also create customized functions. For example, if something isn't supported in Tricentis Tosca Commander, we can create our own function to integrate it with Tosca Commander, so we can utilize it and integrate with the macros."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is it is a completely scriptless automation tool, which I liked a lot. They keep on continuously improving their tools, wherever we are facing any challenges they are able to provide a solution for it. It is easy to learn, everyone can easily read and understand what is happening with the scripts. Any business user or function tester can use the tool efficiently. This is a complete solution package."
"I face no challenges or stability issues."
 

Cons

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"The user management could improve in Tricentis Tosca because it is confusing. It would be better to have it in one place. Having to add it to the cloud and to a specific project can be a mess."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
"Needs a UI to visualize the test case development."
"ScratchBook execution needs to be improved as Tosca crashes multiple times."
"One thing to improve in Tricentis Tosca is that it's not compatible with Excel based forms. Another area for improvement is that the tool is not compatible with OpenText applications. The support and licensing cost for it also need improvement. The tool also needs cloud support, as it's currently on-premises only."
"The product needs to improve its pricing. It also needs to improve the infrastructure and DEX agent setup."
"The reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is high, but altogether it offers you the ability to automate all sorts of applications: desktop, web, mobile, etc."
"We have around 200 [concurrent] licenses and the cost around $1.4 million a year."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"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."
"They are probably more expensive than other comparable tools, but you also get the full suite of testing tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
25%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Retailer
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.
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
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 IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.