Tricentis Tosca Reviews

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. 

Our customers use it for low-code, no-code testing, near-field communication (NFC) testing, Salesforce testing, and UI testing.

The ability to pick up when a desktop picks up, which makes it much faster to run tests. Also, its ability to work across multiple systems is very useful.

More and more artificial intelligence (AI) is coming in. So, some amount of AI to create natural language processing (NLP)-based test cases and manage defects would be very helpful. This is because the technologies have evolved in the last five to six months, so there is a potential opportunity there.

For creating test scenarios, looking at defects, historical defects, and kind of putting in generative AI would add value. 

I have been using this solution for around four years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers because this is not ideal for smaller customers. Smaller customers tend to be using open source tools, but actually, to get it to the enterprise level, Tricentis is used a lot.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is easy, and ten is difficult to set up. It is usually deployed on public and hybrid.

I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is on the higher side. There are open-source tools available, and there are other tools available that are much smaller. If you are looking at commercials, then there are options available that are newer.

So, if you need to accelerate the delivery of your solution and leverage the low-code, no-code platform, that's where you can actually bring in quite a lot of automation with the region type in Tricentis Tosca. Maintaining your test scenarios, running them immediately to create mind maps, and then using new-generation tools like xMine to integrate with Tricentis Tosca can significantly reduce the testing cycle time from a typical 20-35% of the software engineering cycle to as low as 10%. This can significantly improve the turnaround time for decision-making.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. There are lots of alternatives that are available at a good price point. So when you are working with large customers who have big budgets, bigger budgets, certain places are something that they are going to take up. When they are working with medium-sized customers, potentially, the signatures could actually address that.

My primary use case for Tricentis Tosca is SAP testing.

I'm using Tricentis Tosca as part of test automation, so it reduces the test execution time, and this has improved our organization. This is the main advantage of the tool, compared to doing it manually.

All the features available now in Tricentis Tosca are valuable.

One thing to improve in Tricentis Tosca is that it's not compatible with Excel based forms. Another area for improvement is that the tool is not compatible with OpenText applications. OpenText is a company which provides multiple applications.

There's also an issue with the support for Tricentis Tosca. If they don't provide support within a faster timeframe, then you will wait for the solution, and you'll lose, e.g. whatever you're gaining from the tool, you'll lose, because of the delayed support.

Tricentis Tosca also needs some improvement, and this is why my rating for it is only eight out of ten, e.g. it needs to have more compatibility to be able to take advantage of its multiple features.

The tool also supports on-premises deployment only, and it needs to elevate to cloud deployment. It should be easily accessible by anyone, and this is currently not the case. Other competitor tools, or most of the competitor tools, have moved to cloud, except Tricentis Tosca.

The licensing cost for the tool also needs improvement.

If these changes were to be made, then I could give Tricentis Tosca the perfect score: 10 out of 10.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for six years.

The stability and reliability of Tricentis Tosca is just 60% for me.

We were able to contact technical support for Tricentis Tosca, and they gave us a delayed response. In order to get our problem solved, we had to wait for one month.

The initial setup for Tricentis Tosca was a mix of both straightforward and complex. If you are using just one component, the setup was straightforward, if you wanted to integrate the tool with the multiple components, then the setup becomes complex.

The installation was standard in terms of how long it took to complete, e.g. one week. If there was integration, it could be completed in three weeks.

I've seen a return on investment from the tool, but only when it was used long term, e.g. in more than three years time.

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.

Tricentis Tosca is a testing tool, so we can implement it in any software projects.

The tool is only applicable for on-premises deployment. Currently, it's not possible to deploy it via public or private cloud.

I'm using version 15 of Tricentis Tosca.

I did the deployment of the tool myself, and didn't use an integrator, reseller, or consultant. One person can deploy Tricentis Tosca.

We have 1000+ people in our environment who are using the tool.

Product-wise, I'm rating Tricentis Tosca eight out of ten. Service or support-wise, my rating for it is six out of ten.

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 are using this product for web UI testing, SAP, and API testing.

We are using a multi-user environment and the central repository gives everyone very easy access, which lets them re-use the models or whatever artifacts they need from other teams.

Apart from that, with the distributed execution, we are able to execute thousands of test cases in a very small amount of time.

These two things, I feel have been very helpful in my project.

I have found the test templates to be very useful.

Distributed execution with RDP is highly useful.

This solution is very easy to learn and any non-programmer or manual tester, with little experience in automation, can pick it up quite easily. 

It has a built-in repository to store all of the artifacts in the same place.

The inbuilt test datasheet that it has can be simplified and improved.

There are some performance challenges, specifically when we are not using it on a virtual machine, but when we are using it on a local machine.

In order to integrate test management tools, we have to buy another product call Tosca Connect. It would be better if this were included so that integration with tools like Jira or Azure DevOps was included out of the box.

One of the issues that we are facing is that the size of the repository continues increasing. They should provide tools to minimize or at least reduce the repository size.

I have been dealing with Tricentis Tosca for between two, and two and a half years.

Tricentis Tosca is very stable and we are using it extensively. We have people working in India, as well as in the US and Europe, so we use concurrent licensing. Most of the time, everything is being utilized.

It is pretty scalable because of the templates. We can have a single template expand into hundreds of test cases, so it is scalable. In my project, we have between 50 and 60 people how are using it.

The technical support is an area where Tricentis can improve. Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response. There is a time lag between the process of raising the ticket and getting a final resolution. There is some resolution in the interim, but to receive a final resolution will usually take between two and three weeks.

I had to call technical support for one of the issues regarding a test data survey. We didn't have Microsoft Excel on our workstations so there was a question of how to upload the data. The final resolution for that issue took two to three weeks, or even longer.

I was not involved in the initial deployment, although I feel that the installation of it is simple. I am just not aware of how to configure the repository.

My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing.

I was not involved in the decision-making process.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using Tricentis Tosca is that for test automation, you are not required to be a programmer or very technical.

Overall, this is a good product and I definitely recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.