No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CrossBrowserTesting vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 22, 2026

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 10.8%, down from 20.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis Tosca10.8%
CrossBrowserTesting1.5%
Other87.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
reviewer2740515 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer 2 at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Automation test development becomes accessible and effective for functional testers
Tricentis Tosca is a codeless tool, making it easy for everyone to understand the transition of how to develop scenarios or test cases. In Tricentis Tosca, analyzing failures is straightforward because every time it fails somewhere, I get the screenshot, which helps me analyze how and why it failed. It has all the modules, including some pre-built ones that can be reused efficiently. Compared to other code tools such as Selenium, where I used to develop one script in one day, with Tricentis Tosca I can easily develop one script in four hours or three hours, saving four to five hours in a day.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our site's conversion from a static to an adaptive flexible layout was a major goal for our web site, and CrossBrowserTesting was an invaluable tool for trying out that new code."
"The technical support is good."
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"We no longer need to have a full QA team, testing is more quickly and reliably reproduced, and scheduled daily tests assist in catching any bugs which fall through the cracks and make it to the production environment."
"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"As a codeless automation tool, the product offers a user-friendly experience without requiring extensive coding knowledge. Users can easily handle various applications, including web applications, SAP applications, Windows applications, and even Salesforce applications, without manual coding."
"I am impressed with the product's script test."
"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."
"The most important feature is its ability to support the technical automation of specific clients that we cannot use with other tools."
"Testsuite accomplishes what a lot of different tools did before."
"Our organization is completely based on automation of the activities."
"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 solution has improved our time to release on production; everything is automated now, which makes everything move faster."
 

Cons

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up, as I still sometimes experience lag, which no one loves."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"The speed to connect to mobile devices needs improvement, and sometimes the connection fails."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"In terms of areas for improvement, Tricentis has a variety of tools, even its test management tool called qTest. Tricentis Tosca does have integration with different Tricentis tools, but the integration is geared towards a larger organization perspective. For very small organizations that have minimal licenses, the integration needs to be improvised. For example, I belong to a smaller organization that has only one license, so the capability that the tool provides for integration isn't sufficient because my company needs to have separate workspaces. When Tricentis Tosca is going to be running, it is going to use that license, but my company wants another separate workspace to record, relay, and test. This is what my team has been struggling with, and the mechanism is probably there, but that needs more time and investigation, so I can't say that I'm one hundred percent certain that Tricentis Tosca, in terms of integration for a smaller organization is insufficient. Another area for improvement is that Tricentis Tosca is currently just a Windows-based tool which affects the market because nowadays, Windows isn't the only operating system, for example, there's also Apple or IOS that's moving much faster than Windows."
"The solution is expensive."
"Licenses are expensive, but they are worth using."
"In Tricentis Tosca, we need to capture the element each time. If they could implement an auto-heal feature, it would capture automatically by detecting it from the page."
"The integration with mobile testing could be useful."
"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."
"I feel that the Tosca tool should be improved for handling Siebel applications. Tosca doesn't handle Siebel applications as well as it handles other platform applications."
"The technical support services are generally good, though there are areas for improvement regarding response time and overall competence."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"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."
"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."
"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."
"​It is an expensive tool compared to other test automation tools. It has a lot of advantages over other tools."
"The tool's pricing is lower than that of other automation tools."
"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."
"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
Transportation Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise72
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

No data available
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
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 CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.