Tricentis Tosca Reviews

I use the solution for software validation.

The product's database capacity should be increased. The product has certain shortcomings in cloud storage. From an improvement perspective, cloud storage must offer more features.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for a year. I am a user of the solution.

The product is not very stable when used with cloud storage. It is very hard to load the screen, making it difficult to use the tool in cloud storage.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My whole organization uses the product.

The product is used every day.

There was another product I had experience with in my previous organization.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is easy and ten is difficult.

The solution is deployed on the cloud model.

The solution can be deployed in a few hours.

Speaking about the feature of the product that has the largest impact on our company's testing process, I would say that I use Selenium to take care of the coding part. In Tricentis Tosca, we can't use Git code, considering the user-based experience and UI for the testing process.

Speaking about the codeless test creation feature in Tricentis Tosca, I would say that in some of the software where the quality assurance team does the verification, Selenium is used by quality analysts. In Selenium, we used to write the codes to check basic stuff. In Tricentis Tosca, we don't have to write any scripts.

Integrating the product into my company's CI/CD pipeline affected the release cycles in a good way.

For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.

Considering the emerging trends in the automation space, I would say that Tricentis Tosca is a good software.

I rate the tool a seven and a half 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.

We use this solution for risk-based testing in conjunction with test optimization and test automation.

Our testing landscape ranges from web applications to mobile applications to mainframe to PDF. The tool takes care of most of the testing requirements with relatively minimal effort.

Tricentis Tosca has evolved from being a functional test automation tool to becoming a Continuous Testing platform. It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority. 

It has also enabled teams to optimize risk coverage and enabled them to test more wisely.

Risk-based testing, test optimization, and support for over one hundred technologies are some of the most important capabilities of the platform. Many may argue that the same can be achieved by other tools as well, but not all within the same platform. The ease of maintainability is also a differentiating factor.

Even though the platform has been continuously evolving, there is room for improvement. For example:

• Test reporting hasn't been as impressive as the other components of this platform.
• Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation.

This is a very stable solution.

This solution is easily scalable.

I would say that they have decent support. They can be contacted via live chat, email, and online incident forms.

I was using Selenium WebDriver a few years ago. 

I switched to Tricentis Tosca because of its methodology and support for more than one hundred technologies.

The initial setup is straightforward, provided that the consultants from the company are involved.

We used a mix of both in-house staff and consultants for our implementation.

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

I evaluated other solutions including both Selenium and QTP.

For organizations who want to aim for a unified continuous testing platform, and are willing to pay for it, Tricentis Tosca can be a decent investment.

We primarily use this solution in a mixed environment having web and desktop applications, integrating with each other and over an API Gateway. API based and Financial Services portal testing created using modern technology using C# and ReactJS.

- Brought a good environment of test automation

- Allowed a significant increase in Continuous Integration

- Great User Interface and ease of checking all your artifacts of Testing.

- Makes optimal use of Model-based Test practice in getting Object-references from the application.

- Script-less, so less maintenance headache for non-technical users also.

- Drag and drop functionality to create and re-use your Test Cases

- Excellent re-use of Excel functionality for formulas and functions.

- Conditions which let the test case branch off from the Template. Helps work out different scenarios for data.

- Has been tried out on SAP, Oracle Apps, and IBM COGNOS BI applications. With a few tweaks works well with these applications.

- IF and LOOP statements introduced with the latest version.

- Improved performance of Web-Based Tests. WHILE LOOP and IF made better and more responsive with added error recovery options.

- Intuitive based options available, along with a rudimentary record and play functionality.

- Next version will even have the visualization tools required to see the interconnections between the TCD and the Test Cases, along with the workflow in the TCD and Tests.

- New and improved visualization for multiple browsers and a totally new Wizard with TBox out of Box support has been added to the (v9.2) of TOSCA Commander.

- Access to Business Intelligence (BI) features of comparing a DB to another one, also have been added as plugins.

- Access to an Analytical Engine to view and get reports from the Test Runs.

- Version 13 has also brought in BI testing and improvements on SAP Test scenarios

- Upgrades to the newer version if extra Add-ins are installed sometimes causes weird issues.

- Needs a UI to be open and present when running the tests. Cannot visit the DOM like in Selenium.

- Needs a UI to visualize the test case development.

I have used it for the past nine years.

None seen as such, except it has a reliance on the Network for Licenses. If the network is lost, then the license will expire and crash/close the application.

The scalability depends on the Licensing model you take up.

Customer Service:

Excellent almost 16x5 service with issue resolution within a given 24-hour time frame.

Technical Support:

- Great Customer Support, technical from the first step.

I have been using HP QTP and Selenium for Test Automation. Switch was mainly due to Team constraints and management wanting to try a new tool which is easier for the Business Analysts also to collaborate with.

Setup is simple but requires learning of the tool and how it does things before you can optimally use it.

We had an in-house implementation.

We have seen an exceptionally good ROI, as we reduced the number of Tests from 4000 to around 89 scenario's which can be run in an automated manner with additional data (so in actuality we have around 1.4M tests, which can theoretically be run without human intervention). We have a full-stack CI pipeline for running these along with JIRA (requirement gathering and test results per Story), to the final TeamCity run for each check-in to the Dev branch.

Pricing is steep if you go for the premium model. My advice would be to buy a mix of licenses, depending on the need. The Tricentis Sales are rather good at helping you with this, once you give the intent to buy. They are not just shoving you the highest premium toy/license.

I evaluated TestComplete, HP UFT ALM, Selenium / SpecFlow / Cucumber.

Take the online training on Udemy before you confirm the intent to buy it.

We use Tricentis Tosca to test workflows. 

I like how the modules are set up, particularly how you can use the screens you're automating. This automation helps save both time and money because we use less test capacity regarding personnel.

You can scan an entire browser or application window and define all the controls you want to steer, which you can reuse. In other tools, you have to define each control individually, so this feature in Tricentis Tosca is quite nice.

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.

I have been working with the product for eight years. 

I am not satisfied with the tool's technical support. Sometimes, they provide a hint when contacting support, and we figure out the solution ourselves. There are instances where they acknowledge an issue but say they won't solve it until the next release, which might be over half a year away. The response time is quick, but the support is not always very helpful.

Neutral

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 overall product a seven out of ten. 

The solution has streamlined the regression testing process by integrating with Solution Manager.

The most valuable feature is automating regression testing scripts linked with Solution Manager. This functionality supports our current requirement for automated testing without utilizing other features like LiveCompare.

One major area for the product's improvement is simplifying the synchronization process of test cases between Tricentis Tosca and Solution Manager. It has been a challenge and could be streamlined to enhance user experience.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for approximately six months.

The product is stable. 

The platform is scalable. 

The technical support services are generally good, though there are areas for improvement regarding response time and overall competence.

The initial setup was straightforward. However, synchronization of scripts from Solution Manager to Tosca was a critical part that required careful handling.

Our in-house team handled the implementation. 

I rate the platform an eight out of ten. 

Tosca has been used for automated testing with our business process management tool, known as Athium, as well as our GRC tool, Archer.

It assists us in putting together automated testing for those two platforms in order to manage test coverage and do it in an automated manner as opposed to how it was done manually.

The most valuable aspect of using Tosca is that its user interfaces are intuitive. 

With the resources, we can quickly learn the product. You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues. It gave us a greater level of confidence when we were carrying out those tasks.

Some of those testing with other code-based setting frameworks found it to be much more fragile. As a result, managing and updating were much more difficult than with Tosca.

In terms of tool limitations, there is not a lot that the vendor would need to develop at this time. I believe that the Tosca tool's setup capabilities, as well as functionaries, could easily assist us in a very nice way with our automated testing effort.

There are some things that we would need to do on an organizational level. We did not implement the process of our primary automated testing tool. The IT teams are still relying on the coding framework, which is either Ruby cucumber or Java cucumber, to complete a large portion of the automated testing.

We would have to delegate a large portion of that work to Tosca, which would rely heavily on training the existing automated testing team. Also, we would have to obtain a license for the product and ensure that all of them are operational.

While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly.

I have been working with Tricentis Tosca for a year and a half.

The product is extremely stable and provides excellent value. 

We no longer have to manage the stability, and we no longer have to perform tests manually.

It gives us a much better idea of what kind of test coverage we have, as well as whether or not the system will be stable with automated testing in place.

The stability has been great.

I would give them a nine out of ten for their assistance. They were responsive, as well as assisting us to be fully enabled as soon as possible.

Our teams use qTest for a lot of test management and test planning, and some of the IT teams use qTest heavily, whereas a couple of the application teams, use Tosca.

The initial setup was simple, but there were a few areas where we needed to consult with the support team.

The support team was extremely helpful in assisting us in configuring the system correctly as well as providing and sharing some best practices for setup and configurations.

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

It has a wide range of capabilities. And, even though you pay probably twice as much, you get a lot more for your money.

If the teams are implementing and they are doing agile development and want to stay on track with their agile deliveries, the automated testing goes hand in hand. Tosca can be an excellent enabler for you to be able to do the testing at a much faster pace than if you were trying to do that with other manual testing and that does not slow you down.

It works very well if the organization is trying to move toward a more agile approach, and the ability to do automated testing lends itself very well to it.

I would rate Tricentis Tosca a nine out of ten. It's pretty good.

The best feature is the speed in which we are able to get our automation up and running. We had an unorganized library of regression test cases. We have, within the first six months, been able to automate 85% on our critical business processes and we have been able to maintain that while keeping our BCR ratio down. We have also seen about 234 defects per month in production to less than 8.

We are able to allocate more resources on projects instead of maintenance. Our maintenance has dwindled down to two employees and we have the confidence to try and other things and explore other units.

The only thing I am not happy about is not so much the product, but it's that we don’t a good way to control licenses. Sometimes people are using licenses at their desk and when they go home, they still have the license. There is no good way to control this. When we have an issue that someone tries to log in and they can’t, it’s down to the fact that someone has walked away with 3 licenses and they aren’t using them.

I've used it for one year.

There we're no issues with the deployment.

It’s been absolutely perfect for our organization. For a year and a half, we have been constantly running regressions and the results have been 100% consistent. If we do miss something and it misses production, it’s only due to a manual oversight and has nothing to do with the solution. When we follow our process, it’s consistent.

I am about to test it in a really big way. So far it has scaled to my needs. I am taking it organization- and vendor-wide in the next 6 months. Let’s see what happens when we bring a Cognizant on.

I would say it’s excellent. We have the best support ever. They have just gone over to the Magic Quadrant. I hope they are scalable with that move and we still get the same support.

We have used previous versions so this was down to an upgrade.

The use of the data sheet is not as clear-cut as we might think it would be. Some grasped it quickly and some did not. It depends on skill level whether or it is straightforward or complex. When it clicked, it worked well. It took a little longer than we would have liked.

I would say, take the training and go in to the product and use it the way they recommend to use it. They trained as and it works well. Some listen and kindly say we will use it the Tricentis way and don’t, they end up seeing problems. If I were to make a recommendation, Tricentis is as the top of the list.