BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

BrowserStack and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3, while SmartBear is ranked #28. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

589 Views
449 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 110 Tricentis Tosca reviews

14,913 Views
8,247 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

CrossBrowserTesting

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack, CrossBrowserTesting, and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 848,716 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.7%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 20.4%, up from 16.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Michael Hutchison

Web Specialist at Mayo Clinic

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

Read full review

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."

"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."

"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."

"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."

"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."

"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."

More BrowserStack pros

"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."

"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."

"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."

"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."

"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."

"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."

"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"Object Identification Wizard."

"It's been very helpful to have connectivity with mobile. The tool also identifies some of the actual changes from the recordings on the actual testing suite. That is something that I really like."

"I am impressed with the product's script test."

"The product enables codeless automation."

"The initial setup was straightforward."

"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."

"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."

"The scriptless automation tool is one of the important features."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."

"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."

"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."

"I would like to see clearer visibility."

"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."

"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

More BrowserStack cons

"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."

"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."

"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."

"Tricentis Tosca could improve on its mobile automation solution."

"They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies."

"A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software, particularly during upstream testing, before system and unit testing."

"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 product's test case management functionality needs enhancement."

"The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades. Going through this current upgrade, we were delayed a month because we are using a third-party tool. It's called Tosca Connect by Tasktop. When this latest upgrade broke that relationship between the two, it took Tricentis a month to come back with a workable solution... Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint."

"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."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"The price is fine."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."

"I am satisfied with the cost."

"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."

"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."

"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."

"A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros."

"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

24%

Financial Services Firm

20%

Government

11%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for...

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 34% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 19% of the time

Katalon Studio vs BrowserStack

Compared 2% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs BrowserStack

Compared 2% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 15% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 7% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

April 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

April 2025

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

March 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Overview

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

SmartBear

Tricentis Tosca is primarily leveraged for test automation across web, SAP, API, and mainframe applications, offering robust support for both regression and functional testing.

Tricentis Tosca's test automation capabilities extend to front-end and back-end testing, including processes like RPA and UI-based regression tests on Microsoft Windows. It supports Agile environments with multiple applications, enabling Salesforce automation, API endpoints, and end-to-end automation workflows. Tosca caters to diverse testing needs, integrating well with tools like Jenkins and Bamboo, although upgrades and customizations present challenges. Licensing costs and performance issues during loading and scanning are concerns, along with substantial learning curves for new users. Enhanced AI features and better reporting are on users' wishlist.

What are the key features of Tricentis Tosca?

Tosca BI: Ensures data integrity and accuracy in business intelligence testing
Tosca Commander: Centralized control for easy test management and maintenance
Model-Based Test Automation: Facilitates test creation without scripting
Integration Capabilities: Works seamlessly with Jenkins and Bamboo for CI/CD
Diverse Application Support: Compatible with mobile, web, APIs, and SAP
Scriptless Nature: Simplifies usage and reduces maintenance efforts

What benefits should users consider?

Enhanced Automation: Streamlines testing processes, saving time and resources
Scalability: Adapts to growing demands within an organization
Test Management: Centralized control enhances efficiency and oversight
Ease of Use: Scriptless approach lowers the barrier to entry for users

Tricentis Tosca is implemented across various industries, serving sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail with test automation solutions to ensure application quality and reliability. Agile teams in these industries benefit from its multi-application support and ability to manage complex end-to-end testing workflows. The tool's integration capabilities are particularly useful in environments that rely on CI/CD pipelines, ensuring continuous testing and quick feedback loops.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.