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

TestProject [EOL] 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

TestProject [EOL]
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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

Ashu Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
An easy-to-use tool that saves time and functions within a limited budget
The solution's reporting system should be clearer and easier to understand for a layperson. I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it. For a layperson, the solution should be easy to use. Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product. The product's current price should be lowered to attract potential customers.
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

"The ease of web and mobile functional testing is pretty easy on TestProject."
"The automation and AI are very good."
"The script-less part of it was good for novice users."
"Ability to carry out automatic testing without having coding knowledge."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."
"For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing."
"It is easy to automate tasks, highly flexible, straightforward to learn, and easy to maintain."
"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten as I am satisfied with it."
"This tool has test data management capability along with test management."
"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."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
 

Cons

"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."
"In an upcoming release, there should be a SaaS offering available."
"The support is a weak point since they discontinued the tool."
"We'd like to see a direct cloud from TestProject instead of some other third party."
"Difficult trying to configure on more than one browser."
"I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it."
"The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic."
"Might have a learning curve, as it does not follow the traditional Record-Play functionality, but tests have to be built from requirements or Agile story cards."
"The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars."
"It requires some coding customization that requires expertise."
"The Vision AI implementation works very slowly, affecting the speed of our work. The exploratory testing feature is not working for version 2023.1, which we are currently using."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
"The technical support services are generally good, though there are areas for improvement regarding response time and overall competence."
"I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect. That would be like the next step."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product...With TestProject, there is a need to pay a certain amount towards its licensing costs."
"The solution is free."
"We have around 200 [concurrent] licenses and the cost around $1.4 million a year."
"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."
"The pricing and licensing of Tricentis Tosca were alright. Many customers look for end-to-end enterprise solutions, there were not many challenges with the pricing. However, the customers who are coming from Selenium or similar, feel they're paying a premium for this Tricentis Tosca license. If the right person is there for the implementation of the Tricentis Tosca, then it is one of the best tools in the market."
"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."
"I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"​It is an expensive tool compared to other test automation tools. It has a lot of advantages over other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
41%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about TestProject?
The script-less part of it was good for novice users.
What needs improvement with TestProject?
The support is a weak point since they discontinued the tool. They went commercial, and most of our work wasn't useful anymore. The support or the transition plans for people who were already using...
What is your primary use case for TestProject?
We have a mobile app that we need to build regression testing packs, and we spent almost a year building quite a few test cases for automated testing on that mobile app so that they can run every d...
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, Wix, Flir, Payoneer
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 Tricentis, UiPath, OpenText and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.