We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Test and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Regression Testing Tools."The statistics that are available are very good."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"It's stable and reliable."
"The tool can be handled without any knowledge in parameterisation, especially the TestCaseDesign which makes the tool mighty and stable."
"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."
"Object Identification Wizard."
"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."
"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 most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the ease of use, you do not need to program if you do not want to."
"This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"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."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
"The support we received from Tricentis Tosca was good, but it can improve."
"The solution is expensive."
"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."
"There should be ease of data manipulation within automation test cases."
"Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation."
Earn 20 points
OpenText Silk Test is ranked 13th in Regression Testing Tools while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Regression Testing Tools with 96 reviews. OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". 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 Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, OpenText UFT Developer, Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.