Tricentis Tosca Reviews

It's a very user-friendly tool. Anyone can learn it easily without needing any coding skills. You can just watch the demos or videos, and then start using it because it's very straightforward and user-friendly.

Data management is simple. You can manage and use your data and test cases. Resiliency is a key feature.

There is also version control. 

It has all the features you need. You can see your testing status, generate reports, and have a dashboard to track the progress of your projects. You'll see how many tests passed or failed, how many defects were raised, and other traceability metrics. 

In one go, on the dashboard, you'll get a lot of information so that the management can know what's exactly going on with the testing projects. It's the best.

I would like to see something in terms of AI capabilities. 

I have been using it for four years. 

Technical support is available 24/7. I am satisfied with the support. 

Positive

I work on UFT, Selenium, and a couple of local automation tools as well, like LEAPWORK and AutonomIQ.

I conducted a proof of concept (POC) comparing Tosca with other tools.The benefits, features, and return on investment led me to choose Tosca.

Tosca is a low-code no-code automation tool, allowing direct automation and reusability of test cases. Changes are simple to implement. The user interface is visually appealing and user-friendly. No skilled or professional training is required.

The initial setup is straightforward. It can be done within a couple of weeks. 

It allows for easy tracking and achieving ROI. It integrates with Jira and other tools.

It depends on the project budget. So, it's difficult to quantify the percentage of savings.

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

The enterprise license is expensive. They have an extra option for the same license, but the price depends on various factors.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. Price is one limitation. There are certifications available, and once you pass, you become certified. The interface is completely codeless. I use it as an enterprise solution, and it saves money for companies.

It saves money for companies, especially for automation. For example, with an automation task, executing the three different lead steps can be complex and require some programming, which can lead to issues.

Use cases for Tricentis Tosca include applications that interact with multiple platforms, such as SAP, web applications, and mobile applications. For instance, a typical use case might involve an application that connects to SAP, a web application, and a native mobile application. The workflow may then return to the server and interact with web and SAP systems.

Tosca is coupled with SAP ECC and the SAP application itself.

It offers many features, such as risk-based testing and scenario creation using Kafka. Tosca performs well for web applications, particularly in terms of object identification and overall functionality, but its performance lags when it comes to SAP, client applications, or mobile applications. 

The issue is that even though the components are tightly integrated, object identification can be quite slow, sometimes taking five to ten seconds. This delay is noticeable in UFTA. Additionally, reading data from external Excel files might contribute to the slow performance, though it's difficult to measure this precisely as a parameter.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for two years.

The response and everything were a little bit faster, but for certain scenarios, it took longer.

Neutral

My company faced significant issues in the initial setup while migrating QA scripts to the production environment. The problem is that Tosca is randomly jumbling the steps—what should be a sequential process gets mixed up, with, for example, step three appearing before step one and step five coming after step eight. 

Another team is actively working with Tricentis to resolve these issues. The environment setup has become overly complex and confusing, which should ideally be much simpler.

The first-time deployment was relatively easy. The challenges were on our side, such as obtaining the necessary approvals. It took about a month to complete end-to-end because certain approvals were required on our side.

The value of Tricentis Tosca depends on your company's structure and the duration of the project. For instance, if you have a project that lasts only two to three years and you're trying to implement automation, you may not see a return on investment before the project ends and moves into production support. Production support usually handles random tickets; if it's just regression testing, the tests are repeated without adding much value. This makes Tosca less suitable for short-term projects or applications with limited duration. However, investing in Tosca makes more sense if the application is static and continuously enhanced.

It is more expensive compared to other tools on the market. The cost is a significant factor, and while we try to build client confidence, it’s still a challenge. When the licensing costs are introduced, some clients hesitate or even opt-out. 

From an environmental standpoint, we’ve noticed that some existing scripts stop working whenever a new upgrade or patch is applied. This leads to a time-consuming process of identifying the root cause. We eventually realized that after upgrading the task coverage, the scripts failed because they could no longer identify certain objects or elements. The issue arises without clear information on why the identification failed. The application would launch as usual from a specific location, but the scripts suddenly stopped working after the modules were changed or updated.

Overall, I rate the solution as five out of ten since I face challenges with the environment setup, user management, and other aspects.

Tricentis Tosca has many use cases. Currently, we are using it for Salesforce testing. The solution can also be used for work safety testing and for API testing.

Tricentis Tosca supports multiple technologies, which means there is no need to use different tools for various tasks. In our current project, we are conducting Salesforce testing and API testing, both of which can be done using Tricentis Tosca. This makes it easier for us to test different technologies. Additionally, Tricentis Tosca is scalable, allowing us to easily create multiple combinations of test cases using templates by varying the data. Tricentis Tosca also offers distributed execution, enabling us to conduct parallel testing and execute a high number of test cases, depending on the number of agents we have available. This greatly speeds up the application testing process.

The scalability is a valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca.

Tricentis Tosca currently does not support any mobile testing and can be improved.

I am interested in exploring the features related to artificial intelligence that can help generate data feeds and assist in reducing the time required to design scripts. Therefore, I would like to see AI-related features in the upcoming phase.

The quality of the technical support and the response time has room for improvement.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for over 20 years.

I give the stability of the solution a seven out of ten. In general, the stability is satisfactory; however, we encounter performance problems as the size of our repository increases.

I give the scalability of the solution an eight out of ten.

The quality of the support and the response time is lacking.

Positive

I previously used Micro Focus UFT Developer. However, back then, there were significant differences between Micro Focus UFT and Tricentis Tosca.

The initial setup for a single data report is straightforward, however, if we are using multi-user repositories, it will require some experienced technical assistance.

I give the initial setup a seven out of ten.

The deployment duration may vary based on the infrastructure, but it typically takes a couple of hours.

If we don't need a multiple-user repository, we just download the installation file and proceed with the installation of Tricentis Tosca. However, a valid license is necessary to use the software. In the case of a multiple-user repository, connecting an SQL server to Tricentis Tosca becomes a prerequisite before we can start using the solution.

The implementation is completed in-house.

I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven. The solution is priced high.

I give Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

We have up to 80 people using the solution.

I highly recommend Tricentis Tosca to others due to its extensive support for numerous technologies and platforms, making it a valuable tool.

We have used the product for web application automation and SAP functional automation, as well as for Microsoft Dynamics 365 process automation.

There is a specific feature in Tricentis Tosca called Vision AI. What it does is basically it'll capture the entire screen, and you can automate anything that can be viewed on our screen. For example, if you are trying to access an application like Teams, so if you want to select any user and call him, you can do that. Anything that is on a screen, you can automate using that Vision AI tool.

The interface is pretty simple, and it's user-friendly, so people with minimal knowledge also can start using the Tosca tool. The widgets and the invoicing are also user-friendly.

It's stable and reliable.

The solution can scale.

Support is helpful. 

Pricing is affordable. 

In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides. So basically, if you want to automate something, you have to really do some research and then start doing it. Having documentation would be helpful, and that is something that needs to be provided, maybe as a jump start to getting going with the product.

There are certain engines that are available that will identify the objects. Yet, there are some engines that are not available, so we need to customize them.

The setup can take a while as the licensing is confusing. 

The response time for support can be slow. 

I've been using the solution for around two or three years. 

The stability is excellent. I would rate it nine out of ten. 

We have a team of 250 people on the solution right now. We have five active licenses on five servers. We have mostly testers on the product. 

It is a scalable solution and a powerful tool. I'd rate scalability eight out of ten. 

We likely will increase usage in the future. 

There is a lack of a knowledge base, and the time it takes for them to respond is a bit slow. While there is a delay in response, their help is quite good. 

Neutral

I've also used Micro Focus and Selenium.

I'd rate the initial setup around six out of ten in terms of ease of deployment. The initial setup was difficult. However, we took support help from the Tosca team, and then we tried to resolve the issues. 

The only issue really is the licensing issue. You need to activate the license and for activating the license, and there is no specific straightforward way to do it. You need to connect to the Tricentis support team, and then you need to get an activation link, followed by their code and all that. It's a challenge.

For deployment, if you have the activation link, it'll be done immediately, instantly, maybe in hours. Otherwise, if you do not have the activation link, then it might take days since you need to connect with support.

Most clients I come across prefer open-source solutions and may move towards Selenium to keep the tool cost down. However, if we are using commercial tools like this one, it will take two to three years to realize an ROI.

The pricing is good. I'd rate it eight out of ten in terms of affordability. 

We are partners. 

I'm working with the latest version of the solution. 

I would recommend the solution since the tool is user-friendly and easy to use. It comes with a lot of features, and it's a very powerful tool. I would definitely recommend it compared to other tools.

I'd rate it nine out of ten overall.

We are using it daily as the best automation solution.

The most important feature is its ability to support the technical automation of specific clients that we cannot use with other tools.

In two areas, the update process posed challenges. Firstly, updating the software is quite tricky. Recently, with the new version released in 2023, we encountered several issues with our scripts. Secondly, managing the flow for license management was complex, possibly due to the intricacies within our company. It was not easy to manage all the licenses smoothly.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for five years.

The solution is easy to scale. More than 80 users are using this solution. I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Customer support requires a little bit of response time when we have some problems, but overall, opening requests and the answers were quite fine.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy.

I rate the initial setup a five out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product is very costly.

The licensing model of Tricentis Tosca is tightly bound to user roles and activities, making it complex to manage. There are distinctions between test users and test runs, which can lead to some confusion. It would be beneficial if test developers were less restricted in their usage, perhaps by allocating licensing based more on test runs than individual developers. This could facilitate greater involvement of testers in test development without significantly increasing costs, as licensing could be based on usage metrics rather than individual user accounts

Test data management capabilities are very proprietary and very specific. We have to compare the test data anyhow.

In the end, we consolidated the two solutions. One was the open-source solution for test automation, and the other was for specific protocols. We decided to have only two types of solutions.

Integrating with Jenkins or Jira requires some setup and configuration, and achieving compatibility with our existing systems, including Jenkins and our test governance processes, hasn't been straightforward. As of now, we haven't achieved a fully integrated solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use the product primarily for functional testing. It is highly effective for mainframe-related test cases and other traditional applications. Our environment includes many mainframe tools and applications that are automated using Tosca.

The platform's most valuable feature is model-based testing, which is effective for test case design and optimization.

The product's test case management functionality needs enhancement. 

We have been using Tricentis Tosca for the last six years.

Customer service and support have been excellent. We have reliable contacts within the company who provide prompt and effective support whenever needed.

Positive

The tool's initial setup was complex and erratic, with minimal support and limited test case management capabilities compared to the Quality Center (QC). Over time, improvements have made the deployment process more straightforward, particularly for automation, which is now considered excellent. The current setup requires only a central server and individual client machines, making it relatively simple and quick to deploy. However, the tool must still catch up with QC in test case management functionality.

Due to Tosca's automation capabilities, we have observed 30-35% savings in testing efforts, resulting in significant cost savings.

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

We evaluated other tools but decided on Tosca due to its effectiveness in mainframe environments and competitive pricing. While UFT performs similar tasks, it requires more time for coding. Tosca's scriptless nature provides a significant advantage, improving cost efficiency and productivity.

Tricentis Tosca offers robust support for risk-based testing through its model-based testing approach. This methodology includes a risk analysis component that helps cover various test scenarios, including combinatorial testing and CVD, thus ensuring comprehensive test coverage. While the impact on testing processes might not be significant regarding productivity, Tosca's scriptless nature streamlines test case automation and maintenance, making it accessible to functional analysts without scripting expertise. 

Additionally, it integrates with test data management tools, such as CA Test Data Manager (TDM), to ensure updated and relevant data availability for test case execution. 

Regarding recommendation, it is well-suited for legacy or packaged applications but may not be optimal for web-driven projects where Selenium offers superior functionality. However, considering Tosca's roadmap, which heavily aligns with SAP and other packaged applications, it remains a preferable option for enterprises with diverse testing requirements.

I rate it a seven.

We are using the solution on cloud. We have the updated version. Each time a new version is released, we already have it. I'm not sure what version we're on right now.

We have teams of around 5 to 10 people for different projects that are using this tool.

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.

The technology stack that they have now is bigger than when it started. That gives us more flexibility on aligning to one single tool to get automation from different technologies in one test scenario. Instead of dividing them and splitting them into different parts, we can go from end to end with this tool.

I would like to see more implementation of AI on the self-healing aspect. That would be like the next step.

I have been using Tricentis for a couple of years.

Technical support is fine. We get a very quick response from them.

We have this as a service, so the initial setup is not that complex. It's already there, and we can plug in and start doing our automation. But last year, we started with a project from scratch, and we needed some support from Tricentis itself. It wasn't complex, but it required some time to get the tool to the point where we could start using it. It took about four weeks.

There is an annual cost for Tricentis.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10. 

Something that people should probably be looking at is how technical their team is and whether or not they can do coding. If they are more on the business side where they know all the different flows of the business cases or scenarios, that would be a very good way to use the tool because technical expertise is not required. You should have a couple of resources, but it's not necessary to have  high technical skills.

We utilize Tricentis Tosca to reduce our release cycle timing for our SAP releases. We have at least one release every quarter. We also use it for automation.

We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool.

Test case design and test data management are the most valuable features for us.

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.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for the last nine years.

In terms of stability, I would rate the solution at nine out of ten.

I would rate Tosca's scalability at eight out of ten. We have 10 users and 10 exemption licenses in our organization. We plan to increase usage in the near future.

Initially, we were able to create a case. Right now, that function is not very useful. We also have to request remote access. In addition, sending large files is a bit cumbersome because our organization's policy does not allow us to upload anything to Tricentis' cloud or network.

Thus, I would rate technical support at six on a scale from one to ten.

Neutral

We used Micro Focus UFT and SmartBear. UFT requires a framework each time, and SmartBear requires coding. Both of these solutions had limitations with regard to our enterprise-level technology stack, and therefore, we decided to go with Tricentis Tosca.

The initial setup is easy, and I would rate it at eight out of ten. The deployment process took at least 48 to 72 hours.

We deployed it ourselves with help from third-party teams. We had four people involved in the deployment including engineers and a manager.

If you are purchasing less than five licenses, then the pricing is high. On a scale from one to ten, with one being low and ten being high pricing, I would rate this solution at eight.

Tricentis Tosca does not provide much support for reports and mobile automation. The speed of execution of mobile automation is low. Also, test case creation and the creation of models take a lot of time in the mobile engine.

Overall, I would rate Tricentis Tosca at eight on a scale from one to ten with one being the worst and ten being the best.