Ranorex Studio vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

Ranorex and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Ranorex is ranked #19, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. Ranorex holds a 3.3% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 14.2% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Ranorex users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

3,078 Views
1,878 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 113 Tricentis Tosca reviews

18,670 Views
10,455 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 16, 2025

Tricentis Tosca and Ranorex Studio are competitive products in the automated testing tools category. Tricentis Tosca appears to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive automation capabilities and broader platform support.

Features: Tricentis Tosca offers scriptless automation, a model-based approach, and wide application support across SAP, Oracle, and IBM COGNOS BI. It also features integrated test data management, risk-based testing, and supports mobile testing. In contrast, Ranorex Studio integrates with various technologies, supports precise UI recognition, and provides robust mobile testing using Ranorex Spy.

Room for Improvement: Users of Tricentis Tosca have highlighted the need for better handling of Siebel applications, enhancements in test data management, and improved UI stability. Ranorex Studio users seek improved cross-platform testing support, better object recognition, and enhanced browser compatibility with more operating systems beyond Windows.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca is available in cloud configurations, including Hybrid and Public Cloud, providing flexibility in deployment, though users report slower response times from customer support. Ranorex Studio is primarily on-premises, praised for excellent customer service with fast response times. Both tools provide effective technical support, yet there is feedback indicating room for improvement in response efficiency.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca is priced high, making it challenging for smaller enterprises but offers significant ROI due to its automation capabilities, ideal for large-scale projects. Ranorex Studio, also costly, offers reasonable pricing relative to its features, with flexible licensing options that benefit clients. Both tools require strategic license management to optimize ROI, with user feedback indicating strong ROI in well-planned deployments.

To learn more, read our detailed Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,227 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

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

19th

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

9th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

16th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

113

Ranking in other categories

Service Virtualization (1st), API Testing Tools (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.3%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 14.2%, down from 19.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tricentis Tosca	14.2%
Ranorex Studio	3.3%
Other	82.5%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Aws V

IT Team Leader -Automation Manager at Citco

Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet

There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman. Additionally, expanding language support beyond C#, Java, and JavaScript to include Python would be beneficial. An AI feature that automatically detects automation object properties and suggests actions would be a great addition. So, in future releases, AI solutions for automated property identification would be helpful.

Read full review

reviewer2740515

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.

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

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"The solution is stable."

"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."

"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

"Object identification is good."

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."

More Ranorex Studio pros

"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."

"The most valuable feature is being able to create a test case by recording some scenarios and then leasing that task case to other scenarios."

"We like the fact that it works across mobile, desktop, web, and APIs. Due to this, the solution has a broad range of applications."

"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."

"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."

"The solution has plenty of features compared to other solutions."

"It's stable and reliable."

"I face no challenges or stability issues."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."

"If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it."

"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."

"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."

"There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman."

More Ranorex Studio cons

"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."

"The solution is expensive."

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

"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."

"Needs a UI to visualize the test case development."

"The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars."

"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."

"The source controls that are in Tricentis Tosca have some problems. For example, if you use Selenium or use Java-based application, it's easy to match code from two developers. However, if you're a developer and going to look at Tricentis Tosca, it's very difficult to use the source control measure."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"We paid €3,000 (approximately $3,300 USD) for this solution. When you add the runtime licenses it will be €3,500 (approximately $3,900 USD)."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."

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

"The licensing cost for Tricentis Tosca is expensive. It has multiple features, but to use all of its features, you have to pay for additional licenses."

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

"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."

"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."

"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."

"There are different types of licenses: enterprise or professional. The cost varies."

"They are probably more expensive than other comparable tools, but you also get the full suite of testing tools."

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

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	23

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	23
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	72

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

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 10% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 7% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 6% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 6% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 3% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

January 2026

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

January 2026

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Also Known As

No data available

Orchestrated Service Virtualization

Overview

Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

Ranorex

Tricentis Tosca offers model-based testing that supports both technical and non-technical users through a user-friendly interface, enabling scriptless automation and seamless integration with UI and non-UI applications.

Tosca's modular approach enhances test maintenance and reuse while delivering comprehensive automation for diverse testing environments. Backed by risk-based testing and automated data management, it supports end-to-end testing across API, SAP, and desktop applications. Tosca's integration capabilities extend to environments like Salesforce, PHP webshops, and mobile apps, effectively enhancing Agile team workflows. Despite its strengths, room remains for improved reporting, object recognition, and more efficient upgrade processes. Enhancing documentation and mobile testing support could further elevate its functionality for many.

What key features does Tricentis Tosca offer?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies interactions for non-technical users.
Model-based testing: Facilitates the easy creation of automated test cases.
Scriptless automation: Enables quick test development without coding.
Integration capabilities: Supports connections with multiple platforms like SAP and Salesforce.
Modular approach: Enhances the reuse and maintenance of test components.

What benefits to expect from Tricentis Tosca?

Efficiency: Streamlines the testing process for faster release cycles.
Versatility: Suitable for diverse application environments including web and desktop.
Productivity: Boosts Agile team integration for comprehensive testing.
Risk-based testing: Prioritizes testing efforts based on potential impact.

In retail, Tricentis Tosca automates inventory and transaction testing, ensuring efficient system updates. Financial services employ it for regulatory compliance through automated test scenarios in mainframe and PDF environments. Telecommunication companies utilize Tosca for API testing, aligning services across network platforms seamlessly.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

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

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

January 2026

Free Report: Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Mobile App 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.