We performed a comparison between OpenText Business Processing Testing and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"Good use in Agile workshops, where the person needs to conceptualize the tests before the developer provides the complete application interface."
"The initial setup isn't too difficult."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
"It's stable and reliable."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues."
"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools."
"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."
"With regard to areas of improvement, report customization should be easier. It would be good if Tosca could provide standard reports for at least 20 variants. At present, there are only three to four variants. The mobile engine needs to be faster and easier to use; it is a bit cumbersome. Also, the object identification in the mobile engine needs improvement. I would like to see easy-to-use customizations for reports in the next release."
"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."
"The Test Management options are still weak - improvement is outlined, but not yet visible. I"
"I would like to be able to manage different projects in one repository or have better data exchange between repositories."
"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."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
Earn 20 points
OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 37th in Functional Testing Tools while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 96 reviews. OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". 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 ". OpenText Business Processing Testing is most compared with , whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete.
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.
