No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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 (15th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st), 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.
AKSHAYRATHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior engineer at Nagarro
End-to-end regression automation has accelerated delivery and now secures complex test data
I think Tosca can be improved, particularly in AI capabilities because right now Tosca does not have any strong API capabilities. It has some AI features in the newer version, but many organizations have not adopted these due to version-specific problems, as some are still using older versions. From an AI point of view, they can enhance reliability since the world is moving towards AI, and every tool must be integrated. While Tosca has made attempts, I have not used them and they are not widely adopted, so they are stuck in the testing phase in my organization. I would also mention that while I am currently using Tosca Mobile, the loading part and connectivity issues need improvement. They should better integrate AI features that are already present but not widely used across many organizations. Reliability on the AI aspect needs enhancement for practical application. From the perspective of governance and security, I believe Tosca can develop its own LLM or leverage third-party LLMs while maintaining security and risk management regarding client data. Many companies prefer using Tosca due to data security, which is crucial. An in-house LLM could significantly enhance its debugging power and provide helpful solutions upon test case failure.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is a good solution for a global transnational company."
"Helped organise the manual test cases so they were documented correctly, which was invaluable as it allowed for reviewing and improving of test scripts so they could be followed by a number of different people which helped with resourcing."
"In addition, we found PractiTest very user-friendly and customizable."
"Since we started using this product, our organization's testing functionality has really improved."
"Technical support of PractiTest is awesome. They are always ready to help in any time zone, which makes them stand out from others."
"PractiTest gives us the opportunity to control the testing process efficiently and saves us a lot of time that we had to spend while using other tools."
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"Converting a couple of these test plans into PractiTest was amazing and made a world of difference."
"One feature we like is the live connectivity of the product, in other words, you can push transactions through to live, and you can intercept some transactions and return them back with mocked data."
"The solution is script-less, so you don't need IT knowledge to use the solution in an operational way. This is the most valuable feature. It's also only one of two or three tools that can do good automation on SAP, and in my opinion, it's the best of those."
"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"It was very apparent that Tosca was an all-in-one solution because we could do database testing, UI, and API testing, while the other tools we evaluated each focused on only one area."
"The item that is different from all the other tools is that it's module based."
"The initial setup isn't too difficult."
"The features I find most valuable in Tricentis Tosca are that it's the easiest way to build the scripts and to do the CI/CD process; using Tricentis Tosca is very useful and easy."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
 

Cons

"It does not offer server installation, only software as a service."
"Needs to improve adding the ability to run tests multiple times and setting different parameters."
"There are some features that I would like added: an option to export a part of tests with steps."
"Yes, there are times when server is very slow in response."
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time."
"PractiTest practically requires a lot of sandboxing, demos with their team, and online tutorials."
"The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades."
"Upgrading from one version to another requires maintenance and rework in existing scripts. This is too much for my taste."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
"The stability and reliability of Tricentis Tosca is just 60% for me."
"It would be of great help if they can fix the loading or performance issues."
"I think the new version is not so stable, and that’s what's stopping us from moving over to it."
"Running the regression – if multiple lists are executed at once or if a list contains 200+ tests, it’s a pain to stop the execution."
"It may be different for other companies, but for us, establishing a set of procedures to get people trained was important."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive solution and there is an annual license required. The whole licensing process is confusing and it could be made easier."
"I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it."
"Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked."
"​It is an expensive tool compared to other test automation tools. It has a lot of advantages over other tools."
"The price of Tricentis Tosca is approximately Є10,000 for one license. However, it used to be much cheaper, but they changed their license structure. It used to be a structure where if you bought a license you would receive one year of free support and maintenance. Now they only have a yearly license, and that is expensive."
"There are two licenses: single user and multiple user. A multiple-user license means that several people can work together on one project and collaborate on code stored in a central location. A single-user license is for people working alone on a one particular application. It's much cheaper than a multi-user workspace. If you are getting a large volume of licenses for an enterprise, you can probably negotiate a discount, but I'm not sure about that."
"Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all."
"The tool is quite expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
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 Enterprise75
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis Tosca?
The pricing for Tricentis Tosca is extremely high, and I rate it as ten in terms of expense. It is really pricey in the market, making it more suitable for large enterprises rather than small or me...
 

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, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Regression Testing Tools. Updated: August 2026.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.