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

Telerik Test Studio vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
24th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (17th)
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.1%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 19.2%, up from 17.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.
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

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"The Model-Based Test Automation is the most valuable feature, where you can create reusable components. Even though we are using a scriptless automation tool, there still needs to be an understanding of how to create reusable components and how to keep refactoring and how to keep regression, the test scripts, at an okay level. We are coupling Tosca with some other risk-based testing tools, as well, but automation is primarily what we're using Tosca for, the scriptless, model-based technology which is driving automation for us."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"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."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"The low code is the best feature."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"The initial setup isn't too difficult."
 

Cons

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"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."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
"The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic."
"The integration with mobile testing could be useful."
"The technical support services are generally good, though there are areas for improvement regarding response time and overall competence."
"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."
"Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved."
"We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."
"There are different types of licenses: enterprise or professional. The cost varies."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"If you are purchasing less than five licenses, then the pricing is high. On a scale from one to ten, with one being low and ten being high pricing, I would rate this solution at eight."
"The pricing is high, but altogether it offers you the ability to automate all sorts of applications: desktop, web, mobile, etc."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional 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
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
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

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

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
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 Telerik Test Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.