Tricentis Tosca Reviews

Use cases for Tricentis Tosca include applications that interact with multiple platforms, such as SAP, web applications, and mobile applications. For instance, a typical use case might involve an application that connects to SAP, a web application, and a native mobile application. The workflow may then return to the server and interact with web and SAP systems.

Tosca is coupled with SAP ECC and the SAP application itself.

It offers many features, such as risk-based testing and scenario creation using Kafka. Tosca performs well for web applications, particularly in terms of object identification and overall functionality, but its performance lags when it comes to SAP, client applications, or mobile applications. 

The issue is that even though the components are tightly integrated, object identification can be quite slow, sometimes taking five to ten seconds. This delay is noticeable in UFTA. Additionally, reading data from external Excel files might contribute to the slow performance, though it's difficult to measure this precisely as a parameter.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for two years.

The response and everything were a little bit faster, but for certain scenarios, it took longer.

My company faced significant issues in the initial setup while migrating QA scripts to the production environment. The problem is that Tosca is randomly jumbling the steps—what should be a sequential process gets mixed up, with, for example, step three appearing before step one and step five coming after step eight. 

Another team is actively working with Tricentis to resolve these issues. The environment setup has become overly complex and confusing, which should ideally be much simpler.

The first-time deployment was relatively easy. The challenges were on our side, such as obtaining the necessary approvals. It took about a month to complete end-to-end because certain approvals were required on our side.

The value of Tricentis Tosca depends on your company's structure and the duration of the project. For instance, if you have a project that lasts only two to three years and you're trying to implement automation, you may not see a return on investment before the project ends and moves into production support. Production support usually handles random tickets; if it's just regression testing, the tests are repeated without adding much value. This makes Tosca less suitable for short-term projects or applications with limited duration. However, investing in Tosca makes more sense if the application is static and continuously enhanced.

It is more expensive compared to other tools on the market. The cost is a significant factor, and while we try to build client confidence, it’s still a challenge. When the licensing costs are introduced, some clients hesitate or even opt-out. 

From an environmental standpoint, we’ve noticed that some existing scripts stop working whenever a new upgrade or patch is applied. This leads to a time-consuming process of identifying the root cause. We eventually realized that after upgrading the task coverage, the scripts failed because they could no longer identify certain objects or elements. The issue arises without clear information on why the identification failed. The application would launch as usual from a specific location, but the scripts suddenly stopped working after the modules were changed or updated.

Overall, I rate the solution as five out of ten since I face challenges with the environment setup, user management, and other aspects.

We use the product primarily for functional testing. It is highly effective for mainframe-related test cases and other traditional applications. Our environment includes many mainframe tools and applications that are automated using Tosca.

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

The product's test case management functionality needs enhancement. 

We have been using Tricentis Tosca for the last six years.

Customer service and support have been excellent. We have reliable contacts within the company who provide prompt and effective support whenever needed.

Positive

The tool's initial setup was complex and erratic, with minimal support and limited test case management capabilities compared to the Quality Center (QC). Over time, improvements have made the deployment process more straightforward, particularly for automation, which is now considered excellent. The current setup requires only a central server and individual client machines, making it relatively simple and quick to deploy. However, the tool must still catch up with QC in test case management functionality.

Due to Tosca's automation capabilities, we have observed 30-35% savings in testing efforts, resulting in significant cost savings.

Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools like Selenium, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost.

We evaluated other tools but decided on Tosca due to its effectiveness in mainframe environments and competitive pricing. While UFT performs similar tasks, it requires more time for coding. Tosca's scriptless nature provides a significant advantage, improving cost efficiency and productivity.

Tricentis Tosca offers robust support for risk-based testing through its model-based testing approach. This methodology includes a risk analysis component that helps cover various test scenarios, including combinatorial testing and CVD, thus ensuring comprehensive test coverage. While the impact on testing processes might not be significant regarding productivity, Tosca's scriptless nature streamlines test case automation and maintenance, making it accessible to functional analysts without scripting expertise. 

Additionally, it integrates with test data management tools, such as CA Test Data Manager (TDM), to ensure updated and relevant data availability for test case execution. 

Regarding recommendation, it is well-suited for legacy or packaged applications but may not be optimal for web-driven projects where Selenium offers superior functionality. However, considering Tosca's roadmap, which heavily aligns with SAP and other packaged applications, it remains a preferable option for enterprises with diverse testing requirements.

I rate it a seven.

We are using it daily as the best automation solution.

The most important feature is its ability to support the technical automation of specific clients that we cannot use with other tools.

In two areas, the update process posed challenges. Firstly, updating the software is quite tricky. Recently, with the new version released in 2023, we encountered several issues with our scripts. Secondly, managing the flow for license management was complex, possibly due to the intricacies within our company. It was not easy to manage all the licenses smoothly.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for five years.

The solution is easy to scale. More than 80 users are using this solution. I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Customer support requires a little bit of response time when we have some problems, but overall, opening requests and the answers were quite fine.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy.

I rate the initial setup a five out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product is very costly.

The licensing model of Tricentis Tosca is tightly bound to user roles and activities, making it complex to manage. There are distinctions between test users and test runs, which can lead to some confusion. It would be beneficial if test developers were less restricted in their usage, perhaps by allocating licensing based more on test runs than individual developers. This could facilitate greater involvement of testers in test development without significantly increasing costs, as licensing could be based on usage metrics rather than individual user accounts

Test data management capabilities are very proprietary and very specific. We have to compare the test data anyhow.

In the end, we consolidated the two solutions. One was the open-source solution for test automation, and the other was for specific protocols. We decided to have only two types of solutions.

Integrating with Jenkins or Jira requires some setup and configuration, and achieving compatibility with our existing systems, including Jenkins and our test governance processes, hasn't been straightforward. As of now, we haven't achieved a fully integrated solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We utilize Tricentis Tosca to reduce our release cycle timing for our SAP releases. We have at least one release every quarter. We also use it for automation.

We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool.

Test case design and test data management are the most valuable features for us.

With regard to areas of improvement, report customization should be easier. It would be good if Tosca could provide standard reports for at least 20 variants. At present, there are only three to four variants.

The mobile engine needs to be faster and easier to use; it is a bit cumbersome. Also, the object identification in the mobile engine needs improvement.

I would like to see easy-to-use customizations for reports in the next release.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for the last nine years.

In terms of stability, I would rate the solution at nine out of ten.

I would rate Tosca's scalability at eight out of ten. We have 10 users and 10 exemption licenses in our organization. We plan to increase usage in the near future.

Initially, we were able to create a case. Right now, that function is not very useful. We also have to request remote access. In addition, sending large files is a bit cumbersome because our organization's policy does not allow us to upload anything to Tricentis' cloud or network.

Thus, I would rate technical support at six on a scale from one to ten.

Neutral

We used Micro Focus UFT and SmartBear. UFT requires a framework each time, and SmartBear requires coding. Both of these solutions had limitations with regard to our enterprise-level technology stack, and therefore, we decided to go with Tricentis Tosca.

The initial setup is easy, and I would rate it at eight out of ten. The deployment process took at least 48 to 72 hours.

We deployed it ourselves with help from third-party teams. We had four people involved in the deployment including engineers and a manager.

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.

Tricentis Tosca does not provide much support for reports and mobile automation. The speed of execution of mobile automation is low. Also, test case creation and the creation of models take a lot of time in the mobile engine.

Overall, I would rate Tricentis Tosca at eight on a scale from one to ten with one being the worst and ten being the best.

We use the solution in our company for all kinds of automation, so we cannot specify anything.

Tosca as a tool has matured a lot with new scanning engines being added for different kinds of applications. Copilot and cloud based solutioning are some of new features

Before we bought Tricentis Tosca, we had around three tools, Selenium, Worksoft, and Provar. The amount of automation was distributed between these three tools. So it was always a challenge to maintain all these separate automated scripts. Also, you need to have experts on all these tools. So once we brought in Tosca, we actually removed the licenses for Worksoft and Provar.

The major advantage is that it supports all kinds of applications, so it can be either web-based automation or desktop application automation, SAP or other ERP, or the mainframe, Citrix applications. If you want to automate any kind of applications, you can use Tosca, which is not possible with tools like Selenium, Worksoft, or Provar. There are all application-specific solutions.

I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high. Other than that, when it comes to any new issues, the tool is not supporting some features in the application, and then the need for customization comes as a drawback. These customizations are expensive, and we have to pay for them. Also, for integration with other tools like ALM or Jira we have to buy a Tosca connect license which again utilizes Tasktop tool for the integration. Using Tasktop to carryout the integration with Tosca and ALM or Jira is very time consuming and any kind of maintenance or support needs someone from Tasktop to have a look

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for three years.

My company has a partnership with Tricentis. We are also customers of the solution. I am using Tricentis Tosca 16.0 and now upgrading to 2024.

I face no challenges or stability issues.

Right now, it's around seventy people are using it in our company. More than that, it should be.

It is a scalable tool. It is extremely scalable.

The support is really good.

Our company had opted for platinum support, that is, like, twenty-four hours of service and support, and we are quite happy with the support. They'll come in and support. We face no issues.

I rate the support a ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is really easy. The initial step is maybe around two hours of work to set up the server and all that. After that, it's very easy to give it and take it over to the testing team to start using it.

It takes two hours to deploy it.

Three people are required to install it, which includes one person from Tricentis, one person to set up the database server, and one of the automation admins from the company.

The solution is worth the money.

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.

For maintenance, only one person who is an admin is required.

The solution's features are good.

I think whoever wants to use it should understand the tool's capabilities first before taking a dive so they can try a PoC with the tool and then go ahead to use it. I rate the product a seven out of ten.

Our customers use it for low-code, no-code testing, near-field communication (NFC) testing, Salesforce testing, and UI testing.

The ability to pick up when a desktop picks up, which makes it much faster to run tests. Also, its ability to work across multiple systems is very useful.

More and more artificial intelligence (AI) is coming in. So, some amount of AI to create natural language processing (NLP)-based test cases and manage defects would be very helpful. This is because the technologies have evolved in the last five to six months, so there is a potential opportunity there.

For creating test scenarios, looking at defects, historical defects, and kind of putting in generative AI would add value. 

I have been using this solution for around four years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers because this is not ideal for smaller customers. Smaller customers tend to be using open source tools, but actually, to get it to the enterprise level, Tricentis is used a lot.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is easy, and ten is difficult to set up. It is usually deployed on public and hybrid.

I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is on the higher side. There are open-source tools available, and there are other tools available that are much smaller. If you are looking at commercials, then there are options available that are newer.

So, if you need to accelerate the delivery of your solution and leverage the low-code, no-code platform, that's where you can actually bring in quite a lot of automation with the region type in Tricentis Tosca. Maintaining your test scenarios, running them immediately to create mind maps, and then using new-generation tools like xMine to integrate with Tricentis Tosca can significantly reduce the testing cycle time from a typical 20-35% of the software engineering cycle to as low as 10%. This can significantly improve the turnaround time for decision-making.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. There are lots of alternatives that are available at a good price point. So when you are working with large customers who have big budgets, bigger budgets, certain places are something that they are going to take up. When they are working with medium-sized customers, potentially, the signatures could actually address that.

Tricentis Tosca has many use cases. Currently, we are using it for Salesforce testing. The solution can also be used for work safety testing and for API testing.

Tricentis Tosca supports multiple technologies, which means there is no need to use different tools for various tasks. In our current project, we are conducting Salesforce testing and API testing, both of which can be done using Tricentis Tosca. This makes it easier for us to test different technologies. Additionally, Tricentis Tosca is scalable, allowing us to easily create multiple combinations of test cases using templates by varying the data. Tricentis Tosca also offers distributed execution, enabling us to conduct parallel testing and execute a high number of test cases, depending on the number of agents we have available. This greatly speeds up the application testing process.

The scalability is a valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca.

Tricentis Tosca currently does not support any mobile testing and can be improved.

I am interested in exploring the features related to artificial intelligence that can help generate data feeds and assist in reducing the time required to design scripts. Therefore, I would like to see AI-related features in the upcoming phase.

The quality of the technical support and the response time has room for improvement.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for over 20 years.

I give the stability of the solution a seven out of ten. In general, the stability is satisfactory; however, we encounter performance problems as the size of our repository increases.

I give the scalability of the solution an eight out of ten.

The quality of the support and the response time is lacking.

Positive

I previously used Micro Focus UFT Developer. However, back then, there were significant differences between Micro Focus UFT and Tricentis Tosca.

The initial setup for a single data report is straightforward, however, if we are using multi-user repositories, it will require some experienced technical assistance.

I give the initial setup a seven out of ten.

The deployment duration may vary based on the infrastructure, but it typically takes a couple of hours.

If we don't need a multiple-user repository, we just download the installation file and proceed with the installation of Tricentis Tosca. However, a valid license is necessary to use the software. In the case of a multiple-user repository, connecting an SQL server to Tricentis Tosca becomes a prerequisite before we can start using the solution.

The implementation is completed in-house.

I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven. The solution is priced high.

I give Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

We have up to 80 people using the solution.

I highly recommend Tricentis Tosca to others due to its extensive support for numerous technologies and platforms, making it a valuable tool.

We use Tosca for writing the test cases. It can do multiple things, like linking test cases to requirements and generating custom reports for the queue test. Tosca is deployed on-premises, and more than 500 people are using here. 

I've also worked with Tosca VI, which is part of our PTL automation. When did a POC for Tosca VI where the Tricentis team came to India and designed a solution for our requirements. 

We switched to Tosca because it's a no-code solution. That's the primary advantage because many of our functional testers lack technical knowledge and cannot write code in Java. People without coding skill can also use it. We only need to train them. Multiple functions, loops, and logical conditions are available. If you have an in-depth understanding of the Tosca framework, you can easily automate any complex application.

We're working with multiple on-premise and cloud applications, and we use Tosca's reporting tool for regulatory purposes. One of our applications is built upon BDA visual basic, and Tosca can identify the object of that application.

Tosca generally supports 90 percent of the applications. We handle dynamic applications and multiple popups that appear while running them. I've trained almost 50 people in my organization to use Tosca, and they are now doing well.

Tosca is flexible enough to work with multiple areas, like web, API, database, and retail automation. Tricentis team supports all these areas regardless of your operating system 

Recently, I've been working on an automation application. To date, I've designed almost 10,000 scripts. In addition ETL and AP automation, we are using Tosca API to automate web services.

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.

We create macros in the Excel DVS, and I created multiple tools via VBA as part of the ATL automation to compare source data to the target. We just need to schedule it. We schedule that via Postcard, so the macros we created will compare the source data versus the target data. 

First, Tricentis could improve Tosca's Linux scripting. We can automate Linux scripting, but there are a few commands that Tosca doesn't support. DVS support and the object identification mechanism could also be better. 

I have worked with Tosca for six or seven years.

We don't have many issues with stability. The only problem I had was three years back. The support team came to and resolve that issue. 

Tricentis support is excellent. When we create a ticket, they'll usually resolve it in 24 hours. There is a also chat bot.

Tosca is heavy software, so the prerequisite is 4GB of RAM and a 255 GB hard disk. It takes almost 10GB of hard disk space, and the initial setup is not difficult. You only need to get the EXT, and Tosca comes with multiple programs like Commander and Executor. There are several tools, but we primarily use the Tosca Commander because it contains everything, like the execution, DHN, and reporting parts. 

There are two licenses: single user and multiple user. A multiple-user license means that several people can work together on one project and collaborate on code stored in a central location.

A single-user license is for people working alone on a one particular application. It's much cheaper than a multi-user workspace. If you are getting a large volume of licenses for an enterprise, you can probably negotiate a discount, but I'm not sure about that. 

I rate Tricentis Tosca nine out of 10. The tool has multiple features, and it covers a variety of applications, It's accessible, so anyone can use it even if they're not a technical person. But if you have some programming knowledge, you can create your own customized functions and automate any Windows application. Integration is straightforward, and test management tools are also available. 

A person can get an ES1 and ES2 certification by viewing a video tutorial before starting the actual scripting. They complete the certification work with any demo application to learn how to scan the objects, execute test cases. Tricentis supports 95 percent of applications, and it covers a broad range of areas, like DB, ETL, and website automation.