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 (23rd), 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."
"You can push transactions through to live, and you can intercept some transactions and return them back with mocked data."
"It's integrated with different technologies, desktop applications, package solutions like SAP, and mobile applications."
"The use of automation is most valuable."
"To me, what stands out the most about Tricentis Tosca is that even if I'm not a technical tester, I could pick up on how to use it very quickly because of the mechanisms of the tool, for example, its scanning mechanism. I'm not so technical, but I'm able to maneuver through Tricentis Tosca and derive capability. It's a user-friendly tool. It's not very complex."
"Tricentis Tosca can be easily integrated with SAP infrastructure."
"Compared to other tools we have been looking at, you don't have to be a programmer to operate it, though it helps. It also a product that can be used by business people."
"I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers."
"The product enables codeless automation."
 

Cons

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
"Product quality has declined as it grows, and its updates aren't without fault. The process of resolving problems has slowed, and as it expands into other areas like NeoLoad and other testing tools, the product becomes more complicated. It used to be a small firm with a clear goal, but as it grows, the quality has been affected."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on the ease of use. There is a steep learning curve. The reporting section could be better and some of the new features could be simplified. Additionally, the user management of the client and the server are confusing. There should not be two."
"I would like to be able to manage different projects in one repository or have better data exchange between repositories."
"I would say the reporting part of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"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."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."
"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."
"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."
"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."
"I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five."
"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."
"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is on the higher side."
"The tool's pricing is lower than that of other automation tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
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.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.