Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Tricentis qTest
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (6th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
100
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Regression Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 1.0%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 29.5%, up from 23.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Regression Testing Tools
Unique Categories:
Test Management Tools
15.9%
Functional Testing Tools
20.0%
Mobile App Testing Tools
35.0%
 

Featured Reviews

Anuj-Kataria - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 12, 2023
A very well-manageable tool that offers users with a great UI and UX
Our company still hasn't found a way to mark in Tricentis qTest using APIs when our automation strips run, which is a process that, if introduced in the future, can probably improve the tool. The aforementioned process happens in other tools like Azure DevOps, Zephyr, or Xray but not in Tricentis qTest. In the future, an automated test suite, triggering functionality in the test suite, and execution of automated tests, which could be marked in Tricentis qTest, would be a great addition to the tool. Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users.
Vinayak Bandewar - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 20, 2023
Can conduct parallel testing, supports multiple technologies, and is scalable
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.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well."
"qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location."
"The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."
"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."
"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."
"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."
"The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself."
"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."
"I face no challenges or stability issues."
"Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems."
"The reporting is really nice."
"This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"What I find valuable is that Tricentis is always refining the test methodology. They listen to feedback from the analysts about what the testing tool should do, and then Tricentis always implements it. So all the necessary testing functions are already implemented in their tools."
"This tool has test data management capability along with test management."
"You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues."
 

Cons

"I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use. ALM's... Defects Module is really robust. You can actually walk through each defect by just clicking an arrow... But with the qTest Defects module you can't do that. You have to run a query. You're pretty much just querying a database. It's not really a module, or at least a robust module. Everything is very manual."
"The Insights reporting engine has a good test-metrics tracking dashboard. The overall intent is good... But the execution is a little bit limited... the results are not consistent. The basic premise and functionality work fine... It is a little clunky with some of the advanced metrics. Some of the colorings are a little unique."
"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."
"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."
"As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."
"I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that."
"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."
"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."
"The reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
"Tosca's reporting features could be better. Tricentis had a reporting tool called Analytics, but it didn't function properly after they reworked it. After that, they tried a new approach with key-tracing, and that didn't work."
"Their license management should be improved. One of our customers is a global customer. They want to use one licensed server and then split the licenses based on the different users of the different business units, but currently, there is only one license server that everybody can access. There is no control, and that's why sometimes congestion can happen."
"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."
"A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software, particularly during upstream testing, before system and unit testing."
"Setup wasn't that straightforward; it was more complex. It all depends on the environment, because there were a lot of errors on our applications. Therefore, it wasn't an easy setup for us."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."
"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."
"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."
"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."
"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive solution and there is an annual license required. The whole licensing process is confusing and it could be made easier."
"My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing."
"The tool's pricing is lower than that of other automation tools."
"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."
"There are two licenses: single user and multiple user. A multiple-user license means that several people can work together on one project and collaborate on code stored in a central location. A single-user license is for people working alone on a one particular application. It's much cheaper than a multi-user workspace. If you are getting a large volume of licenses for an enterprise, you can probably negotiate a discount, but I'm not sure about that."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the pricing a ten. The licensing model is based on a yearly basis."
"Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?
I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?
Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.
What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?
The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall expe...
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
 

Also Known As

qTest
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis Tosca vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: February 2023.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.