We performed a comparison between Apigee and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The analytics feature is quite good."
"Apigee has better scalability than WSA."
"I think the most valuable features are the security features. Of course, the user access control is the same as the security. The other very important issue is the sandboxing capability of Apigee."
"Apigee gives you plenty of opportunities to set up your workspace depending on how you want to manage your APIs."
"One of the best parts of this solution is the implementation as we did not need to use code or out-of-box policies. When it comes to the cloud-based architecture, there is a high level of reliability."
"I simply like how you can personalize your products and put them into product categories. That's what I like the most."
"Apigee is a pioneer in the industry and has good features and functionalities. It is a good tool for API management and it has more advancements than all other tools in the market in certain areas."
"If you have numerous applications and high traffic, Apigee is a strong choice for its excellent features and outstanding performance."
"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is it is a completely scriptless automation tool, which I liked a lot. They keep on continuously improving their tools, wherever we are facing any challenges they are able to provide a solution for it. It is easy to learn, everyone can easily read and understand what is happening with the scripts. Any business user or function tester can use the tool efficiently. This is a complete solution package."
"I am impressed with the product's script test."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"The integration could be improved within the solution. There is a need to pay more attention to this."
"Areas like traffic handling of incoming requests, security features between third-parties and Apigee, and between Apigee and internal network servers, resources, or JSON areas, etc."
"Integration should be improved."
"The entire user across all the layers should be singly authenticated through an external authentication system."
"In terms of the functionalities of a typical API gateway, Apigee is actually doing its job, but when it involves integration with backend applications, which some gateways have, I don't believe it has this functionality. You have to do Java or do some other low-level coding before you are able to do the integration. Apigee has a lot of components, which means that management will be a bit difficult. It probably has ten different components, and all of these components leverage open-source utilities, such as NGINX. When those open-source vendors upgrade their utility, Apigee usually lags behind because they need to do a lot of tests and any required development in their own platform. They need to do rigorous testing to make sure that nothing breaks. Because of that, it takes them a while to upgrade whatever components have been upgraded by the open-source vendor that owns the utility. We've been chasing them for a particular upgrade for well over a year and a half, and they have not done that upgrade. It is creating a security risk for us as an enterprise, but that upgrade has not been done, even though the open-source vendor, the owner of the utility, has upgraded it a long time ago."
"Access restrictions can be improved."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved upon. We'd like it if it was less costly."
"I have heard there maybe be some security issues that need to be addressed. If this is the situation I would encourage taking a look at the security matters."
"I would like to be able to manage different projects in one repository or have better data exchange between repositories."
"The solution is expensive."
"The product needs to improve its pricing. It also needs to improve the infrastructure and DEX agent setup."
"The support we received from Tricentis Tosca was good, but it can improve."
"The user management could improve in Tricentis Tosca because it is confusing. It would be better to have it in one place. Having to add it to the cloud and to a specific project can be a mess."
"It can be quite expensive."
"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. The support and licensing cost for it also need improvement. The tool also needs cloud support, as it's currently on-premises only."
"It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools."
Apigee is ranked 7th in API Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 2nd in API Testing Tools with 96 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Does not require coding experience to use and comes with productivity and time-saving features ". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, Amazon API Gateway, WSO2 API Manager and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Apigee vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
