Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

PractiTest vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

PractiTest
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (22nd), Test Management Tools (17th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (2nd), Functional Testing Tools (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

DC
Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat
It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.
reviewer2740515 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer 2 at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Automation test development becomes accessible and effective for functional testers
Tricentis Tosca is a codeless tool, making it easy for everyone to understand the transition of how to develop scenarios or test cases. In Tricentis Tosca, analyzing failures is straightforward because every time it fails somewhere, I get the screenshot, which helps me analyze how and why it failed. It has all the modules, including some pre-built ones that can be reused efficiently. Compared to other code tools such as Selenium, where I used to develop one script in one day, with Tricentis Tosca I can easily develop one script in four hours or three hours, saving four to five hours in a day.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"The initial setup isn't too difficult."
"The product enables codeless automation."
"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."
"Overall, I rate Tricentis Tosca as a ten out of ten."
"This solution is very easy to learn and any non-programmer or manual tester, with little experience in automation, can pick it up quite easily."
"It's integrated with different technologies, desktop applications, package solutions like SAP, and mobile applications."
 

Cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
"It needs better integration with JIRA."
"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."
"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."
"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 would like to see something in terms of AI capabilities."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"The tool is expensive. It has become overpriced, especially after Tricentis Tosca grew as a company. Initially, we bought a license with an annual support fee, which wasn't too expensive. However, they changed the model, and now we have to purchase a license yearly, which has become quite costly."
"The tool is quite expensive."
"The pricing and licensing of Tricentis Tosca were alright. Many customers look for end-to-end enterprise solutions, there were not many challenges with the pricing. However, the customers who are coming from Selenium or similar, feel they're paying a premium for this Tricentis Tosca license. If the right person is there for the implementation of the Tricentis Tosca, then it is one of the best tools in the market."
"I am satisfied with the cost."
"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."
"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
10%
University
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise72
 

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...
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...
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.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, OpenText and others in Regression Testing Tools. Updated: February 2026.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.