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 8.3, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 20.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 110 Tricentis Tosca reviews

14,913 Views
8,247 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Tricentis Tosca and BrowserStack both compete in the test automation space. BrowserStack seems to have an advantage due to its broader device testing capabilities and cost-effectiveness for physical device alternatives.

Features: Tricentis Tosca offers scriptless automation, a model-based approach, and extensive technology support, including SAP and Oracle Apps. BrowserStack provides cross-browser and cross-device testing, manual testing capabilities with detailed logs, and a wide selection of devices for testing.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis Tosca needs to enhance upgrades for fewer disruptions, improve license management, and offer better visualization and integration with non-GUI apps. BrowserStack could improve integration with other frameworks, enhance stability, and address occasional connectivity issues.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca predominantly supports on-premises, hybrid, and public cloud environments. Its customer service receives mixed reviews. BrowserStack, accessible via public and private clouds, offers quick and efficient support, earning praise for its responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca's high pricing can be a barrier for smaller companies, though it provides significant ROI for long-term projects. BrowserStack, while still seen as costly by some, offers competitive pricing compared to physical test labs, providing ROI through testing efficiencies across numerous devices.

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

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 849,686 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

6.8

Number of Reviews

110

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st), Test Automation Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 20.1%, up from 16.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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 feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."

"The integration is very good."

"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."

"Maintenance of the solution is easy."

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

"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."

"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."

"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

"The Model-Based Test Automation is the most valuable feature, where you can create reusable components. Even though we are using a scriptless automation tool, there still needs to be an understanding of how to create reusable components and how to keep refactoring and how to keep regression, the test scripts, at an okay level. We are coupling Tosca with some other risk-based testing tools, as well, but automation is primarily what we're using Tosca for, the scriptless, model-based technology which is driving automation for us."

"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."

"Tricentis Tosca can be easily integrated with SAP infrastructure."

"The solution has plenty of features compared to other solutions."

"We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool."

"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."

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

"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the ease of use, you do not need to program if you do not want to."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

"I would like to see clearer visibility."

"There is room for improvement in pricing."

"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."

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

"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."

"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."

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

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

More BrowserStack cons

"They need to improve on the reports after the execution of automation tests, since all the current organizations are looking for detailed graphical reports."

"There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."

"It would be of great help if they can fix the loading or performance issues. Sometimes, when I create the test case folder and test cases, it feels like it has loading or performance issues. When passing the objects, we can't sometimes find the exact element. We need to find out that exact location and just give the path for that, and then it works. In the pipeline, when creating Jenkins, we create the list execution for passing the execution list to the commander. I feel it is a bit late, by a fraction of seconds. I first thought it could be my mistake or a setting issue, but I worked on that, and it's not a mistake or a setting issue."

"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."

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

"They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies."

"Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved."

"I would like to see better integration with other testing tools."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is fine."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

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

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

"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."

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

"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."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

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

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

"Pricing could be better."

"The tool is quite expensive."

"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."

"Tricentis Tosca is not expensive at all."

"I am satisfied with the cost."

"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."

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

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

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 33% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 18% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 4% of the time

Katalon Studio vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 7% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

April 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

April 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

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 is primarily leveraged for test automation across web, SAP, API, and mainframe applications, offering robust support for both regression and functional testing.

Tricentis Tosca's test automation capabilities extend to front-end and back-end testing, including processes like RPA and UI-based regression tests on Microsoft Windows. It supports Agile environments with multiple applications, enabling Salesforce automation, API endpoints, and end-to-end automation workflows. Tosca caters to diverse testing needs, integrating well with tools like Jenkins and Bamboo, although upgrades and customizations present challenges. Licensing costs and performance issues during loading and scanning are concerns, along with substantial learning curves for new users. Enhanced AI features and better reporting are on users' wishlist.

What are the key features of Tricentis Tosca?

Tosca BI: Ensures data integrity and accuracy in business intelligence testing
Tosca Commander: Centralized control for easy test management and maintenance
Model-Based Test Automation: Facilitates test creation without scripting
Integration Capabilities: Works seamlessly with Jenkins and Bamboo for CI/CD
Diverse Application Support: Compatible with mobile, web, APIs, and SAP
Scriptless Nature: Simplifies usage and reduces maintenance efforts

What benefits should users consider?

Enhanced Automation: Streamlines testing processes, saving time and resources
Scalability: Adapts to growing demands within an organization
Test Management: Centralized control enhances efficiency and oversight
Ease of Use: Scriptless approach lowers the barrier to entry for users

Tricentis Tosca is implemented across various industries, serving sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail with test automation solutions to ensure application quality and reliability. Agile teams in these industries benefit from its multi-application support and ability to manage complex end-to-end testing workflows. The tool's integration capabilities are particularly useful in environments that rely on CI/CD pipelines, ensuring continuous testing and quick feedback loops.

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

April 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

849,686 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.