Tricentis Tosca Reviews

We use this solution for a lot of their applications. For example, we use GIS map-based applications and develop solutions around them. We also use the technology to draw a polygon and use API for the mobile solution. We use a silver-based application that will soon be obsolete and some cloud-based applications.

The low code is the best feature, and clients like it.

We are still exploring the solution but would like a capability where the infrastructure has a code that we can verify using Tricentis Tosca. We are examining how to integrate this with the keyboard and our credentials through Tosca. We want to integrate with other solutions for credential repositories, so we don't need to provide a username and password in the solution explicitly. It would be good if it could grab a specific key and utilize it in the task for execution.

Currently, with Tricentis Tosca, we need to install it as an application on our machine, but it would be better if we could assess a solution. It requires some coding customization that requires expertise, so having free services along with the licenses would be good. Some clients have complained that they need to pay for additional services every time they open a ticket.

We have hands-on experience with Tricentis Tosca and have completed Tricentis Tosca training because we are an Alliance partner. We utilized it when we completed training on installing the software, ES1 and ES2. We have been trying to purchase this tool for almost two and a half years. Our clients are almost updated on it, and we are about to deploy this solution in our client locations. They will be using version 15.2.

It is a stable solution.

We have no issues with scalability. We have a solution architect and a few team members who will develop it.

The initial setup was not complex, and there were no hurdles.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. From a UI perspective, there are no issues, but pricing could be better. Our clients had been asking for this solution for over two years, and pricing was the main reason we didn't have it. I would recommend this solution to other companies if they have the budget.

Below are the features that are the most valuable in regards to this product:

• With one click, it will scan all the elements on the screen, so that the user can select the required elements for automation tests.
• Exploratory testing gives an option to record a video, has interactive steps to capture a manual test case flow, and it can be converted to a PDF document with links for the video.
• Using exploratory testing, we can send an email to record manual test cases to the business analysts (BAs) who never need a product to be installed in their machine. The recorded files can be stored on a common server (that needs to be set up separately) or they can send those files to the intended automation team via emails.
• Not much in the way of programming skills is required to use this product.

Our organization is satisfied with this product on the technical side of it, but our organization was looking for the reporting part of this product since they undergo an auditing process for each year. The reports should be improved for the Tricentis Tosca product.

They need to improve on the reports after the execution of automation tests, since all the current organizations are looking for detailed graphical reports.

My previous company uses an application which will create a purchase order for their products, so my company wants to track all the purchase orders and the accounts that have been used for testing. We have set up data and automated tests in Tricentis Tosca. Using the Execution Folder (in Tosca) we are able to execute automated tests which gives detailed information for each run/execution. However, we were expecting a report for each execution like what scenario executed, what data was used (dummy customer accounts) and the resulting purchase order numbers.

Tricentis Tosca is able to export the execution results in Excel/PDF format but our company was expecting customized reports, so I mentioned this as room for improvement.

I have worked on this product for six months.

There are no issues with the stability part of the product.

There are no issues with the scalability of the product.

I would rate the technical support a 9/10, their turnover time is very good.

We have used HPE UFT (formerly known as QTP) and Selenium, but some of the critical applications that we needed required different automation tools so we switched to Tricentis Tosca.

The product's setup is pretty much straightforward, no issues in regards to that.

I am not much involved in the pricing and licensing.

We explored tools such as HPE QTP/UFT, Selenium, Ranorex and TestComplete but these tools require some specific programming skills to start. Tricentis Tosca doesn’t require any programming skills and it’s a codeless automation.

For a manual tester who wants to become an automation specialist with no programming skills, this is the right tool for the future.

Tricentis Tosca can be easily integrated with SAP infrastructure. It's a proven solution.

We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for two years.

Tricentis Tosca would be a better option for enterprise companies.

We faced some hardships in implementing the solution because of integration. However, depending on the requirements and considering the long-term benefits, it might be okay to undergo extra difficulty.

I usually recommend the solution to companies that use SAP.

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

We use Tricentis Tosca for Salesforce automation.

Tricentis Tosca has benefited our company by allowing us to onboard testers easily. We have a few developers who develop the code, such as scripts for the team. The manual testing team can execute the code without a problem. 

The regression testing time, was five days earlier. For example, in the current project, it took us five days for the release. Since we have used the solution it only takes us two days. It is a savings of three days. It's easy and much more stable. The results we receive are hard to believe. 

We have experienced that when we used Selenium, we can have some failures. Tricentis Tosca is much more reliable compared to many of the tools. The reliability and efficiency of our teams have improved a lot from the use of this solution.

The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the Salesforce scanning. There are two scanning for Salesforce applications. There is Salesforce scanning and normal application scanning. Object identification has been really useful in Tricentis Tosca.

The API testing has been useful. We can do testing in Postman and we receive good responses. We can import the Postman to Tricentis Tosca and start using it right away. The manual testing to automation can be done smoothly. You get the Postman sponsors from the manual testing team and we can import it to this solution.

There is a source code repository within Tricentis Tosca. There is no need to use GitHub or something else. We can do provisioning and all the switches in Tricentis Tosca. We use qTest as our direct test management tool, and it is integrated with this solution. Once installed it can easily be used and it is very easy to share the objects across the projects, such as if one developer scans all the pages we can share them across all the modules. The modules can be shareable as well. The reusability of some of the features is very good.

Overall the solution is easy to use compared to any other tools, it's very easy to organize and develop. It's simple for new people to have them be onboarded. There's not much coding involved, and the framework is stable.

Tricentis Tosca supports Salesforce Lightning which many other tools will not.

We are using the Tricentis Tosca BI testing module, analytics, and data testing and they have been great.

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.

If you have any issues with the tool, we had to go to the support system of Tricentis Tosca. We cannot change anything, such as the DLL files. We had to wait for them to deploy the package and it takes time. If I have some tool issue, it takes a month to resolve it, because normally the DLL comes, and then we have to recompile everything and then deploy it. It takes a lot of time. 

We use Copado as our CI/CD pipeline and Copado has no integration with Tricentis Tosca. Other solutions can support Copado, such as Jenkins or Areo. We are using a different approach to do the CI/CD operations.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for approximately two years.

Tricentis Tosca is very stable if you compare it to Selenium or UFT.

The solution supports a lot of applications and it supports the leading applications. It can scale very well.

We have approximately 80 people using the solution in my organization. However, we are limited by the licensing cost but what we use of the solution we are using it to the maximum.

In Tricentis Tosca we cannot change anything. If we have some issues, we have to go through the support system and receive the support, but the support system is not that efficient. If you have a blocker from the tool side, it takes a long time for a solution. For example, if I'm a developer, we can use GitHub, Aleo, or any other tool for source control. 

We can check-in, check-out, deduct the files, review, and again do a review, such as pull a request. However, this is not available in Tricentis Tosca. We had to do reviews offline and we cannot give comments on this solution. For example, if I have a junior developer develop something, there is no way I can promote the code into the route directory. I have to do it all on a manual basis. There is no other review mechanism in the tool and neither does it support, integrate with GitHub or any other repository. We should have code within Tosca itself. There is no other way to take out the code.

The support from Tricentis Tosca needs to be improved. I have not been happy with their support. When I try and contact them I have found it difficult to get through to the first level of support. I then have to go through other communication channels for assistance.

I would rate the support from Tricentis Tosca a two out of five. 

If you use other solutions, such as Selenium or UFT, but we had issues in identifying objects. We did not have the same issue with Tricentis Tosca.

Tricentis helped with the implementation of Tosca. We are not using the cloud version because of security and compliance issues. It has been difficult. If it is in the cloud version, it is easy. If you're using the in-house on-premise version it's painful because we are supposed to do the deployment. Each build and deployment takes time, but if you use a cloud version, it is now seamlessly working.

We have a separate team to do the implementation, but it was easy for them. It took approximately two, to three weeks. Many things have to be done first inside, such as the DevOps and management, they need to first get the build. We compare, are we deploy it in our QA server, then we deployed the production server for their process. I am not sure of the exact breakdown of the deployment process time. The full process took a couple of months to set it up.

Initially, we used a consultant to do the implementation.

Tricentis Tosca has minimal maintenance, it is a setup-and-go type solution. The only thing we had to do is create the workspace. We use the two ways to do it, single-user workspace or multi-user space. We have now moved from single to multi-user. That takes some time to do because of the slicing and dicing of the workspace that we have to do. We have to be careful about the planning of Tricentis Tosca. 

The maintenance is straightforward. Once you install it, it's great. There is no need to have any updates everything is controlled to the centralized agent system. If we are to receive an upgrade, it's all handled through our IT team. They update all the systems, to whatever needs changing which is done through a backend system. There is no need to do individual updates.

Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple.

We have evaluated the Copado Robotic tool.

From experience from using UFT, if they just compare UFT to Tricentis Tosca, I think Tricentis Tosca is a great tool compared to any other tool I have experienced.

UFT is much more heavy compared to Tricentis Tosca which is lightweight and easy to learn and to work with. The stability of the Tricentis Tosca application is great. There is no scripting required in Tricentis Tosca as there is in UFT. However, there is more web scripting. You can do scripting separately and if you're going for a commercial tool Tricentis Tosca is the one to choose.

I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

I use the solution for functional and automation testing. 

The solution can be deployed in DevOps and ERP environments like Oracle Fusion. It accelerates testing with the libraries. The product incorporates libraries and is more sensitive to the scans. 

The tool incorporates AI in maintaining and capturing libraries, making script maintenance easier for automated testing cases.

Tricentis Tosca is expensive. It should improve the testing of legacy systems and interfaces. 

The tool offers local support in Mexico with the same language and time zone. I haven't contacted support yet. 

The main difference between Panaya Test Dynamix and Tricentis Tosca lies is the automation testing approach. Tricentis Tosca incorporates scanning and libraries in a model tailored to specific business areas. These capabilities make script and library maintenance more efficient and reduce the time required for upkeep, in contrast to Panaya Test Dynamix's approach.

Tricentis Tosca's deployment is easy and can be completed in two to three days. Three to five people are needed to complete it. It usually takes two people to integrate the system. The exact number depends on what kind of testing is being done. For example, regression testing might need three to five people, especially for handling purchase orders in sales cycles.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander. 

The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations. 

I have been working with the product for five years. 

The tool is 99 percent stable if you follow its key specifications and best practices. 

From the automation perspective, Tricentis Tosca's scalability is good. 

We have a portal to contact the support team. 

Positive

The tool's deployment and maintenance are easy. We get access to the knowledge-based documents in the portal. Deployment can be completed in five to ten minutes. 

The tool is worth its cost. 

Tricentis Tosca should improve its pricing. It is expensive. 

I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten. 

We use Tricentis Tosca for test automation.

The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is the Tosca Commander. Functionality is another thing I find most valuable in the solution.

What needs to be improved in Tricentis Tosca is its centralized repository mechanism because it's not as flexible. The repository in the solution where you store the data and the script for test automation is quite an old-fashioned mechanism that could be improved.

An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Tricentis Tosca is a distributed repository mechanism because it's required in the current installation for my company.

We have a contract with Tricentis Tosca, and we've been using the solution for six years now. We're using the latest version, which is version 14 because there was this bug called the Log4j.

Tricentis Tosca is a pretty stable solution.

In terms of scalability, that's a challenge in Tricentis Tosca. Scaling the solution is quite difficult because it uses only Windows environments, so it's not a good solution for scaling up. Right now, we rely on Windows, but we are moving to the cloud, so scaling Tricentis Tosca would be difficult for us.

The technical support for Tricentis Tosca isn't quick, but it's useful.

The initial setup for Tricentis Tosca was pretty straightforward.

Initially, for the deployment of Tricentis Tosca, we used a consultancy company, but now we do its deployment in-house.

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.

My company is using Tricentis Tosca and is an end-user of the solution.

With the Tricentis Tosca installation that my company has, one person is enough for maintenance.

My advice to others looking into implementing Tricentis Tosca is to limit it. I would use it only for specific test automation requirements, and I wouldn't use it for other purposes because it's a very expensive solution.

My rating for Tricentis Tosca is seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for automation testing. It integrates with other DevOps pipelines. 

The solution has improved out time to release on production. Everything's automated now, which makes everything move faster. 

The solution is model-based. I know and that's the main reason we went there. We are also using Tosca BI, which is the BI module. We're using that regularly for most of our teams. We just purchased it for our Business Intelligence. We ran a POC and then we just purchased it. 

The initial setup isn't too difficult. 

The solution does not have one catch-all product. For example, if you wanted the DB for Business Intelligence, it's a different module that you have to purchase. If you want to do API testing, you need to buy a different module. If you want to do performance testing, which we haven't bought yet, you would need to buy another module. There are a lot of modules you have to buy in order to have full-blown testing capabilities. I understand that they're breaking them up so people who don't want everything aren't forced into things they won't use. However, for those that do want all of the functionality, it can get costly. 

We've been using the solution for probably two to three years so far. 

The stability of the solution is good. It doesn't crash or freeze. there aren't bugs or glitches. 

The solution can scale quite well. We have 16 groups using it. I don't know how many individuals are on it, however, it's likely there are five people per team. We usually don't go by user when we're counting.

We do plan to increase usage in the future. We use it quite extensively already. We may be moving some legacy tools over to it. 

Technical support has been good. We are satisfied with the level of support on offer. 

We used IBM Rational or Functional Tester and it was just outdated and we needed to go down the toolset. We also wanted something that we use as a data model. 

The initial wasn't complex, it was pretty easy, however, when we did the upgrade to the latest version, which is the new way of architecting, that was more of a challenge due to the fact that we're in multiple clouds. That was more of an issue for us to upgrade due to our multiple cloud environment.

We had to work with Tosca quite a bit to get that one done. Of course, there aren't too many folks who are doing what we're doing, so that might be part of it.

The deployment took a quarter of a year. We tried to install it in our environment and that's got a lot of rules in it, and therefore it took a while. For us, the security and architecture had to be approved before we put anything into our complex environment. It also took a while to train people up on it. 

We have three staff members that handle maintenance aspects, however, they also work on different tools as well. They are not full-time on just Tosca.

We hired some consulting hours from Tosca to help us with the tech. We ran a POC, which they helped us with. Then we did have some consulting hours - maybe 30 or so. We also had them train us. It was good.

They also have self-service training. They recommend you take the self-service training before you start working with the consultants. That way you know more, and then it doesn't take as much time with the consultants. 

While our teams are seeing a great benefit, I wouldn't say we see a return on investment. ROI can be subjective.

The solution is expensive. You can do multi-year or you can do yearly in terms of a licensing agreement. You can do whatever you want.

While it's a pricey solution, it's probably more stable and has more capabilities than some of the other solutions out there.

The only other cost, aside from choosing the modules you need, is the server costs as you need to put it somewhere. 

We did look at other options before choosing Tosca, however, I cannot recall which. It was a few years ago now. We did use Gartner to help narrow down our options. 

We are end-users and customers. 

We are using the latest version of the solution, although I can't speak t the exact version number. 

We have the solution on the AWS and Azure clouds and we also have it on-premises. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's stable and it works, however, the cost is high. You also need a high level of knowledge in order to use it. You can't just pull someone off the street and make them a user. There's a definite learning curve.