We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Tricentis Tosca based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: After comparing all parameters, Selenium HQ seems to be the more popular choice, since it is open-source and has very good documentation and community-based support available.
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The stability and performance are good."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"The solution is very easy to implement."
"One notable feature is its ability to handle negative XPath healing processes. If one XPath fails, Tosca can utilize backup XPaths to ensure test cases do not fail due to locator issues, thereby focusing on identifying application-side issues, which is the ultimate goal."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"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."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"The scalability is a valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca."
"We have multiple applications, and it supports parallel execution. It has mobile automation."
"The use of automation is most valuable."
"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"Sometimes we face challenges with Selenium HQ. There are third party tools that we use, for example for reading the images, that are not easy to plug in. The third party add-ons are difficult to get good configuration and do not have good support. I would like to see better integration with other products."
"The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"The latest versions are often unstable."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
"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."
"Primarily I'm dealing with customers looking for a cheap solution, and they are willing to try open-source automation solutions. So from this perspective, the price of Tosca is not as competitive."
"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."
"I would like to be able to manage different projects in one repository or have better data exchange between repositories."
"It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools."
"There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."
"They can make it more stable. I have used this tool for SAP applications. They have an alliance with SAP, and it mostly worked fine, but there were a few glitches. However, we got the required support from the Tricentis team. They are coming up with their new versions and upgrades with respect to how the Tricentis systems as cloud applications are updated, and it would be good if they have a robust accelerator pack."
"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."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Does not require coding experience to use and comes with productivity and time-saving features ". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio, OpenText Silk Test and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Tricentis qTest. See our Selenium HQ vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
