BrowserStack vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

BrowserStack and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. BrowserStack holds a 10.0% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 18.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 26 BrowserStack reviews

4,859 Views
4,470 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 112 Tricentis Tosca reviews

20,328 Views
11,180 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 14, 2025

Tricentis Tosca and BrowserStack compete in the test automation and browser/device testing categories. BrowserStack appears to have the upper hand with its extensive browser and device coverage, crucial for cross-platform testing.

Features: Tricentis Tosca provides a scriptless test automation solution, enabling easy use for non-technical users. Its model-based approach supports a wide array of technologies, making it adaptable. BrowserStack excels in cross-browser compatibility and real device testing, offering valuable tools for mobile app testing across various platforms.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis Tosca faces some issues with upgrades affecting functionality and lacks certain UI features for test visualization. Its handling of non-GUI applications and complex test cases needs enhancement. BrowserStack users report occasional connectivity issues and slower performance, with improvements desired in GPS testing and platform integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca is suited for on-premises deployment and offers a robust support network, though response times can be slow. BrowserStack's cloud-based model allows quick deployment, with efficient customer service and prompt responses. Both platforms provide comprehensive customer support, but Tricentis has some scalability and incident handling areas to improve.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca is considered expensive with a complex licensing structure, yet users report significant ROI through reduced testing efforts. BrowserStack is also costly but more affordable than some competitors, offering cost-effectiveness with its device and browser offerings. Both solutions yield positive ROI through productivity gains and reduced manual testing efforts.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 871,688 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

112

Ranking in other categories

Service Virtualization (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.0%, down from 11.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 18.4%, up from 18.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tricentis Tosca	18.4%
BrowserStack	10.0%
Other	71.6%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features

The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.

Read full review

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 features are the variety of tools available."

"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."

"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."

"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."

"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."

"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."

More BrowserStack pros

"To me, what stands out the most about Tricentis Tosca is that even if I'm not a technical tester, I could pick up on how to use it very quickly because of the mechanisms of the tool, for example, its scanning mechanism. I'm not so technical, but I'm able to maneuver through Tricentis Tosca and derive capability. It's a user-friendly tool. It's not very complex."

"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."

"It offers many features, such as risk-based testing and scenario creation using Kafka."

"The product enables codeless automation."

"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 most valuable feature is being able to create a test case by recording some scenarios and then leasing that task case to other scenarios."

"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 tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

"BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services."

"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."

"There is room for improvement in pricing."

"The solution is slow."

"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."

"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."

More BrowserStack cons

"The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades. Going through this current upgrade, we were delayed a month because we are using a third-party tool. It's called Tosca Connect by Tasktop. When this latest upgrade broke that relationship between the two, it took Tricentis a month to come back with a workable solution... Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint."

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

"They can make it more stable. I have used this tool for SAP applications. They have an alliance with SAP, and it mostly worked fine, but there were a few glitches. However, we got the required support from the Tricentis team. They are coming up with their new versions and upgrades with respect to how the Tricentis systems as cloud applications are updated, and it would be good if they have a robust accelerator pack."

"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."

"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."

"It needs better integration with JIRA."

"It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools."

"The document object model or some aspects of it has a bit of a learning curve."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"The price is fine."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"It is expensive."

"A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros."

"I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."

"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."

"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."

"The pricing of the solution comes as part of our Tosca bundle."

"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."

"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."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

871,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	23
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	71

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 32% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 24% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 16% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 4% of the time

Selenium HQ vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 9% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

LEAPWORK vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 2% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

October 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

September 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Also Known As

No data available

Orchestrated Service Virtualization

Overview

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca offers model-based testing that supports both technical and non-technical users through a user-friendly interface, enabling scriptless automation and seamless integration with UI and non-UI applications.

Tosca's modular approach enhances test maintenance and reuse while delivering comprehensive automation for diverse testing environments. Backed by risk-based testing and automated data management, it supports end-to-end testing across API, SAP, and desktop applications. Tosca's integration capabilities extend to environments like Salesforce, PHP webshops, and mobile apps, effectively enhancing Agile team workflows. Despite its strengths, room remains for improved reporting, object recognition, and more efficient upgrade processes. Enhancing documentation and mobile testing support could further elevate its functionality for many.

What key features does Tricentis Tosca offer?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies interactions for non-technical users.
Model-based testing: Facilitates the easy creation of automated test cases.
Scriptless automation: Enables quick test development without coding.
Integration capabilities: Supports connections with multiple platforms like SAP and Salesforce.
Modular approach: Enhances the reuse and maintenance of test components.

What benefits to expect from Tricentis Tosca?

Efficiency: Streamlines the testing process for faster release cycles.
Versatility: Suitable for diverse application environments including web and desktop.
Productivity: Boosts Agile team integration for comprehensive testing.
Risk-based testing: Prioritizes testing efforts based on potential impact.

In retail, Tricentis Tosca automates inventory and transaction testing, ensuring efficient system updates. Financial services employ it for regulatory compliance through automated test scenarios in mainframe and PDF environments. Telecommunication companies utilize Tosca for API testing, aligning services across network platforms seamlessly.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

September 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

871,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.