Tricentis Tosca Reviews

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.

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 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.

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. 

We were not able to automate the mainframe or maybe the backend test cases to other tools. That is why we switched to Tosca. Tosca can give us the UI plus the backend mainframe and API testing within one tool. That is why we need Tosca.

The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution.

Technical support is good.

The solution offers good tutorials. 

It's pretty easy to use.

The integration with mobile testing could be useful. Currently, they use this Perfecto Mobile as the mobile automation tool. If they could switch to others -such as BrowserStack or other tools - that would be helpful. I have used web UI, the desktop UI, and the API, as well as the mainframe. I haven't seen much from a mobile automation perspective as I haven't used it. I'm not aware if there is mobile automation. However, they really should have this if they don't already.

Scaling can be tedious.

From a scalability standpoint, if you are needing the data from Excel and Excel has lots of records, it may be difficult. I want to try for more records, basically between 5,000 and 10,000 rows reading from Excel. That is a bit of a tedious process. Right now, it doesn't seem very scalable if you want to read the data directly from Excel or any other file.

In Excel, you have to create the tables, rows, columns every time. Then, you have to read from Excel. You have to create a similar table structure in Tosca. It's a tedious process.

We have eight to ten automation engineers using the solution right now.

We do plan to increase usage in the future.

Technical support is good. We get all the information through the call centers and they give us tutorials as well. It's not a problem there. We are satisfied with the level of support we get.

The setup was not done by me. It was done by a separate team. I wouldn't be able to discuss the setup. I installed it on my system, my PCs, and the client. That part was pretty straightforward.

I cannot recall the exact licensing terms of the price of the product.

I did do a proper comparative analysis of other solutions with regards to pricing. 

I did some certifications on Tosca. I tried to do some POCs as well. I'm using the latest version of the solution, which may be 3.2 or 3.5. 

I would advise new users to not go with writing the test cases manually. Try to start automating directly in Tosca, as that would help to save time. If you write manual test cases as well and then we try to automate to Tosca, it takes a lot of time. It's better to jump in right away with the automation-first mindset approach and start writing in Tosca so that you could use it in every execution cycle.

On top of that, if you have a different cycle for business users to do the testing or they are testing at the user acceptance testing, you can give them the test use for Tosca as well. It's pretty easy to use, straightforward and it would save time.

I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use Tricentis Tosca mostly for API endpoints. We are testing the integration with systems.

Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel.

I have found that some of the functions could be missed in the solution for new users. They are not obviously present.

The user interface test can have a high propensity to fail. These fails are because when doing changes there are shifts in the screen, that Tosca cannot see right away, I'm not sure if there's a solution to that problem, but I've noticed it. For example, when something on the screen moves, such as you add a button, it moves somewhere else, and then Tosca can't see it, then it breaks. It's fine, you go in and fix it, but I don't know if there's a solution to this problem.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

We have approximately 100 people using this solution in my company.

The technical support is great. I have not reached out to the support often but when I have they have been very responsive and helpful.

The academy on user interface and the API introduction I found very useful. It has helped me understand some of the features available.

I rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

This is a complete Test Automation solution of our Enterprise Legacy system, which has many technical peripherals. It provides complete automation for apps/services of all domains and technology integration. Although not yet implemented on our site, features like Orchestrated Service Virtualization and Exploratory Testing excite me and have a huge potential for us.

• Helped us to lay a strong foundation for model based test automation
• Increased throughput
• Improved quality
• Better cost optimization
• Faster time to market

• Licensing/Pricing: Licensing needs to be packaged and not too granular at the component level.

• Cloud or Service Offering: It's a licensed installation. I am not sure if it can be used in the mode of "product as a service" offering
• Web Interface: To avoid client installations for certain features

I have been using this for more than 7-8 years of generic use. For the last few years, I have extended its use as a strategic tool for test modernization, automation, and transformation.

There have been no stability issues in particular.

There have been no scalability issues as of now.

Technical support is very good. We have been supported by a very professional technical team from the vendor.

We did use different solutions. We moved to Tosca because:

• It offers a complete automation solution for all of our applications streams.
• Other technologies were unsupported and fell short on our requirements

We are also in process of moving to Tosca for other functions.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward.

I would like to see some competitive pricing and licensing models.

We evaluated HPE's QC and our existing tools.

If you are up to end-to-end test automation, then please give Tosca a try.

Our primary use case of Tosca is for the automation of web-based applications. We currently have five clients who have deployed this solution. I am the practice head and we have good capabilities in this tool.

The solution is very user-friendly and the low code automation is great and very helpful.

It was very difficult to get information about licensing costs. None of that information is readily available. For customers with a smaller budget, it would be helpful if Tricentis could offer options for smaller organizations to be able to use the tool. We've also found that customer support is lacking. 

We've been testing the trial version of this solution for the past several months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Reaching out to customer support is challenging and they could improve on that. 

Neutral

We previously used other tools but our clients switched to Tricentis because of its ease of use.

The initial setup was easy.

This is an expensive solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10.