Tricentis Tosca Reviews

Our primary use case of Tosca is for the automation of web-based applications. We currently have five clients who have deployed this solution. I am the practice head and we have good capabilities in this tool.

The solution is very user-friendly and the low code automation is great and very helpful.

It was very difficult to get information about licensing costs. None of that information is readily available. For customers with a smaller budget, it would be helpful if Tricentis could offer options for smaller organizations to be able to use the tool. We've also found that customer support is lacking. 

We've been testing the trial version of this solution for the past several months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Reaching out to customer support is challenging and they could improve on that. 

Neutral

We previously used other tools but our clients switched to Tricentis because of its ease of use.

The initial setup was easy.

This is an expensive solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Tricentis Tosca is a tool used for system and application testing.

The advantage of using Tricentis Tosca is that we can get started with automation without much investment on solution development, with it following a keyword-driven approach. We have the actions and verifications readily available, so you can get started on the Tricentis Tosca conversion from the first day of training, and this is the advantage we have observed from the tool.

I also like that it is a simple tool, in terms of system testing, though there are other tools now that are good competitors for Tricentis Tosca, e.g. Katalon Studio.

A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software. Sometimes this happens when you're not on the system testing phase, but you're very close to development, e.g. more on the upstream testing, before system testing, unit testing, etc.

For example, you have to inject something as a precondition to the solution on the test, so you have to do some presetting, you have to write some code to it, and you have to make some conditions for upstream testing. Tricentis Tosca is not recommended in that stage, but it's definitely better for system testing, with it being keyword-driven and you have the keywords readily available, especially if you compare it with other tools such as Micro Focus and TestComplete.

Though I'm not currently working with Tricentis Tosca, e.g. I don't have a project utilizing the solution, I've had experience with it in the past year.

We evaluated Micro Focus, TestComplete, and Katalon Studio.

I am in the QA side, and I have almost 20 years of experience in QA. I'm doing all the automations. My experience with commercial tools are customer specific, e.g. if the customer wants to use a specific tool. I have experience on object-based tools and other types, on the commercial side. We use OneSource libraries and the custom frameworks, so that's where I have more experience, compared to commercial tools.

I don't have any current projects with Tricentis Tosca, but my company has a partnership with Tricentis. I'm not in the delivery team, e.g. I'm on the CoE team. Our application testing is more on digitally managing application drivers, so our scope on application testing is minimal. However, everyone's going digital nowadays, e.g. there's the remote setting and other things to come, so we utilize browser-based solutions, testing, mobile, etc.

I'm part of the CoE team where our work involves solutioning, initial designs, and choosing the right tools. We don't get into the product and use the same tool for a long time, in particular, we do a POC. With Tricentis Tosca, we have asked our teams to do a POC using it, because there is nothing more important than learning the tool, so that it can be easily understandable. Based on customer demand, we have done a few POCs for the tool, so our team isn't really involved in the full lifecycle of a project.

Katalon Studio is very similar to Tricentis Tosca, and price-wise, it's lower. This is why I don't compare Tricentis Tosca with TestComplete. I compare the tool with Katalon Studio, which is an open source robot that's similar to Tricentis Tosca, but because it's a free rule, you cannot have everything from it when compared to Tricentis Tosca.

My experience or my inputs on what to add to this solution, or what I'd like to see from it in the next release, would not be great, because our team is not into applications that much. Our scope of testing the applications is minimal. We are more into the panel-based devices and smart devices, e.g. POS (point of sale) or Point of Care devices in the medical field, or input devices, aeronautical flight attendance panels, etc. Those are the areas we are involved in, so they are purely embedded domains.

I'm giving Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten rating.

We have been using this solution in my organization. There are several clients who have come back to us asking for different automation tools and our views on which automation tools can be used in their respective projects.

We have been evaluating for these clients. The evaluations we were doing, was for our client but done within the organization only.

The most valuable feature is the UI.

We work primarily on evaluating the UI. We evaluated Tosca BI and a bit for Tosca APIs and think they are very useful.

The reporting is really nice. There are many clients who ask for a feature with any automation tool that can generate good reports for them. There is only one such tool that facilitates that option, which is Tosca.

The volume for the BI testing is limited. If they could provide a few options to use it, using Tosca only, that could be a great thing because there are a lot of clients who do not actually want to go for the BI, but then they do have the database testing.

I know that Tosca provides the feature but it's very minuscule.

The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars. There are workarounds for that but for example, if I open two tabs that have the same page then it will give me another difficulty in scanning those options. 

In the next release, including this in Tricentis would be great.

I have been acquainted with this solution for approximately eight months.

So far, what we have used has been stable.

I have read some reviews where they have expressed that they are not happy with the stability, but so far, I have not faced any such issues.

The scalability is good. If I had to rate it out of five, I would say that it would be a three-point five to four.

We have anywhere from 500 to 750 people who are using this solution in our organization.

Technical support is good. Their turnaround time is usually within 24 to 48 hours, but normally we have a response within 24 hours.

Previously, we did not work with any other solution.

We have always worked with the demo licenses, which included support from the Tricentis teams. They have always been able to set up the licensing.

I would say that it is not that straightforward.

On average, it did not take more than two to three hours if you know the process properly. To get it started, it will require at least six hours.

The disadvantage is that it is very expensive.

I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive. If it had more interaction and if the license cost was a little less it would be better and rate higher.

The recommendation of this solution depends from client to client and what their requirements would be, the parameters, and what is important to them. 

If the client wants good support and at the same time they want to have a good database included with the Automation Testing Suite, and is ready to spend the money, then we would definitely suggest Tricenta Tosca as a good option.

Again, it is dependant on the client's requirements and what they would want in an automation tool.

If you have Linux or Mac machines, then it gets very difficult to implement Tosca. I would suggest using it. 

For testing, they would want to migrate miscellaneous scripts and use Tosca for those migrations. But, it's very difficult. 

My suggestion would be to go with the Tricentis Suites and the Selenium Automation Suites.

From a positive perspective, I would want people to use the reporting from Tosca. They have very good reporting. The reporting feature is very user-friendly and very easy to use.

I would rate Tricenta Tosca an eight out of ten.

We use Tricentis Tosca for overall test management.

Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira. It's also relatively easy to use and doesn't need experience or a specific skill set.

Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for about eighteen months.

I rate Tricentis Tosca a nine out of ten for stability. We've had no issues so far with Tricentis Tosca's stability.

I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight or nine out of ten for scalability. Around five users in the test automation space are using Tricentis Tosca in our organization.

A couple of times, we approached Tricentis Tosca's technical support and got the answers to our questions.

Neutral

Tricentis Tosca was already configured and running. The installation took 10 to 15 minutes, and access and setup were very, very quick.

We did not need any assistance for the solution's implementation. It could be done without any help.

Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all. Tricentis Tosca's licensing cost seems to be in line with other products. We're currently using a per-user license because there are only four or five users. I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten for pricing.

I use the latest version of Tricentis Tosca. The solution does not require any maintenance because it is all done automatically by the vendor.

I've not found any issues with Tricentis Tosca, and I would recommend it to other users.

Overall, I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

We are using it for user names and login passwords. We are using model-based techniques where they have already entered IDs. Based on the ID, we can create the object, test case, test folder, and test types.

If I want to create a registration for five countries, I will create complete test cases and use the same data. There is no need to create different data or test cases for that. I can use the same data for different countries by using or passing the object from my object type.

In my previous company, I worked on two different projects. One was for the banking domain, and the other one was for the telecom domain. In both projects, I worked with web-based applications plus Windows-based applications by using Tricentis Tosca. I designed around 55 to 60 case designs in one project. I also worked on the test case design, maintenance, execution, delivery, and reporting. I wrote user stories and created some examples for test case stories.

The feature that I have found the most valuable is the recovery and cleanup process. Suppose there is a list of test cases and one test case has failed, it should not impact the other test cases. We can reuse the same test case. We can change the configuration of parameters and then use the test cases on the same thing. So, that's a useful thing. Otherwise, we have to use the cleanup process.

Another useful feature is to have our own library files. We can create our objects in the libraries and reuse them. There is no need to create duplicate data for that.

They have been giving some enhancements recently which means integration is also there. They've integrated with different software like Jenkins, Bamboo. So, we can also create pipeline points. They have recently given SAP and everything, which is very useful.

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.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for around six plus years. 

Its stability is much better. Last time, it was 10 points, and now I feel it is 12 points. 

Tricentis Tosca is actually around 1.2 GB. It takes around 20 to 25 minutes for installation. 

We have different setup files, and we use Java for that. We use jar files for Java, and then we need to set the location and Tricentis Tosca home directory, for which we can set the variable path from environment variables.

I deployed it by myself. 

I am satisfied with the cost

I would definitely recommend this product to my colleagues or my friends because it is very useful if they are using the Tosca Query Language (TQL). We can find exact data from any project, which is one of the best benefits. It is a very easy, convenient product for everyone.

Tricentis Tosca is very easy to understand. We can reuse data, and no redundant data is required. I like this tool. I am also interested in self-learning this tool and its features. 

I would rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten. It's very good performance-wise.

We are primarily using this product as an automation tool, for regression, and as a revision tool. 

Using the automation tool, I can transfer test cases that are being done manually to ones that are automated. After about 30 such instances, I use the regression system from the suite to create all possible combinations of test cases to try with the new version. This gives us an overview of how the software is performing. Also, when major updates take place, we re-run all of the regression tests to make sure that it still conforms to the requirements.

The automation testing functionality is very powerful.

This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it.

The graphical interface means that you don't have to write any code.

The interface is very organized. You can find folders and settings for everything that you need, and you can easily connect things together.  

I would like to see better integration with other testing tools. There is full integration with Selenium and having this with other tools would be good.

Integration with other programming languages would also be helpful.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for the past three years.

I have not really found many problems or bugs when using this product, so stability has not been an issue.

Tricentis Tosca is very scalable. You can easily move from a small test suite to a larger test suit, which I think is pretty good. We about 100 users in the organization.

I have not been in touch with technical support from the vendor.

I also have experience with Selenium HQ, Katalon Studio, and Ranorex.

Our organization is broken into separate sections and there is a team for installation and configuration that handled the deployment. As I am not part of that team, I am unable to judge the complexity of the setup.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to make use of the extensive library that they have. It is a good collection of training videos and documentation, and I would advise everybody to go through these materials. They are really helpful and it will allow them to learn much faster, bringing them to the point where they can use it to its full potential.

In summary, I am really comfortable with this tool, I haven't had many problems, and it's sufficient for our work. In the three years that I have been working with it, whenever I've needed something, I've been able to find it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This is a complete Test Automation solution of our Enterprise Legacy system, which has many technical peripherals. It provides complete automation for apps/services of all domains and technology integration. Although not yet implemented on our site, features like Orchestrated Service Virtualization and Exploratory Testing excite me and have a huge potential for us.

• Helped us to lay a strong foundation for model based test automation
• Increased throughput
• Improved quality
• Better cost optimization
• Faster time to market

• Licensing/Pricing: Licensing needs to be packaged and not too granular at the component level.

• Cloud or Service Offering: It's a licensed installation. I am not sure if it can be used in the mode of "product as a service" offering
• Web Interface: To avoid client installations for certain features

I have been using this for more than 7-8 years of generic use. For the last few years, I have extended its use as a strategic tool for test modernization, automation, and transformation.

There have been no stability issues in particular.

There have been no scalability issues as of now.

Technical support is very good. We have been supported by a very professional technical team from the vendor.

We did use different solutions. We moved to Tosca because:

• It offers a complete automation solution for all of our applications streams.
• Other technologies were unsupported and fell short on our requirements

We are also in process of moving to Tosca for other functions.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward.

I would like to see some competitive pricing and licensing models.

We evaluated HPE's QC and our existing tools.

If you are up to end-to-end test automation, then please give Tosca a try.

Tricentis Tosca can be easily integrated with SAP infrastructure. It's a proven solution.

We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for two years.

Tricentis Tosca would be a better option for enterprise companies.

We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration. However, depending on the requirements and considering the long-term benefits, it might be okay to undergo extra difficulty.

I usually recommend the solution to companies that use SAP.

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