CrossBrowserTesting vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

SmartBear and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #26, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. SmartBear holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 19.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

667 Views
525 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 109 Tricentis Tosca reviews

15,036 Views
8,245 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Tricentis Tosca and CrossBrowserTesting are competitive tools in the software testing category. Tricentis Tosca has a higher satisfaction rate due to its advanced automation capabilities and seamless integration, while CrossBrowserTesting offers extensive browser compatibility testing features.

Features: Tricentis Tosca offers powerful test automation, risk-based testing, and seamless integration with various tools. CrossBrowserTesting stands out for its browser testing capabilities, real device cloud services, and advanced debugging tools.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis Tosca could improve in handling larger projects, reducing complexity for beginners, and expanding its user base with more intuitive onboarding processes. CrossBrowserTesting might benefit from enhancing its automation capabilities, improving performance on older devices, and offering more competitive pricing options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca offers a comprehensive deployment model with robust customer service. CrossBrowserTesting provides a straightforward SaaS deployment option with satisfactory customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca requires a higher initial investment due to its extensive automation features but offers significant ROI in the long term. CrossBrowserTesting presents a more budget-friendly option, suitable for basic browser testing needs and providing satisfactory ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 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:

Categories and Ranking

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

26th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

109

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st), Test Automation Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.8%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 19.8%, up from 15.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Antonio Oteri

IT Telecom Quality Senior Tester at TIM

Ability to automate tests across various platforms and simplifies test creation

From what I've seen with my colleagues who make the software selection, the prices for this software in Brazil are too expensive to be applied to anything but huge customers. I'm surprised because I was in charge of planning and control at the company before, when there was a manager there. Normally, the company has structural licenses that are based on the company they are selling to. I see that these companies cannot spend this money on Tricentis. I think Tosca is losing this type of market. They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies. The same happened in the past with SAP, which changed its policy and also made licenses for low.

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 extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."

"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."

"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."

"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."

"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."

"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."

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

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

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"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."

"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."

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

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

"It offers many features, such as risk-based testing and scenario creation using Kafka."

"The low code is the best feature."

"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."

"Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

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

"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."

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

"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."

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"The document object model or some aspects of it has a bit of a learning curve."

"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."

"The solution is expensive."

"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."

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

"I would like a better user interface."

"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."

"Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"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."

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

"The pricing is high, but altogether it offers you the ability to automate all sorts of applications: desktop, web, mobile, etc."

"The tool is quite expensive."

"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."

"In terms of the licensing costs for Tricentis Tosca, we are spending more or less $70,000 per year. We have a very complex mechanism because there are some business users and some BI users, so the licensing structure is not simple, but support is included."

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

"Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all."

"I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven."

"Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked."

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

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

25%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Government

11%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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 UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...

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 scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...

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

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 60% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 12% of the time

Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 11% 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 7% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 6% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

February 2025

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

January 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Overview

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

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

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca

February 2025

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

See our list of best Functional 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.