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

OpenText Silk Test vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 2.0%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 9.4%, down from 18.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tricentis Tosca9.4%
OpenText Silk Test2.0%
Other88.6%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

JG
Manager of Central Excellence at Alpura
Easy to set up with good documentation and easy management of testing cycles
The solution allows for a complete test cycle. The management of testing cycles are easy. We have good control over test cases. We can capture functional testing very easily. We're actually able to accelerate testing now and have end-to-end cycles for testing. We didn't used to have these capabilities. It's easy to automate and accelerate testing. The product offers very good cross-browser testing capabilities. We can do continuous testing and regression testing.
AKSHAYRATHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior engineer at Nagarro
End-to-end regression automation has accelerated delivery and now secures complex test data
I think Tosca can be improved, particularly in AI capabilities because right now Tosca does not have any strong API capabilities. It has some AI features in the newer version, but many organizations have not adopted these due to version-specific problems, as some are still using older versions. From an AI point of view, they can enhance reliability since the world is moving towards AI, and every tool must be integrated. While Tosca has made attempts, I have not used them and they are not widely adopted, so they are stuck in the testing phase in my organization. I would also mention that while I am currently using Tosca Mobile, the loading part and connectivity issues need improvement. They should better integrate AI features that are already present but not widely used across many organizations. Reliability on the AI aspect needs enhancement for practical application. From the perspective of governance and security, I believe Tosca can develop its own LLM or leverage third-party LLMs while maintaining security and risk management regarding client data. Many companies prefer using Tosca due to data security, which is crucial. An in-house LLM could significantly enhance its debugging power and provide helpful solutions upon test case failure.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Using this DLL functionality we were able to automate our product."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"The solution is user-friendly with respect to automation."
"It is a fine product; it is a powerful tool, and it needs commitment."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"One notable feature is its ability to handle negative XPath healing processes. If one XPath fails, Tosca can utilize backup XPaths to ensure test cases do not fail due to locator issues, thereby focusing on identifying application-side issues, which is the ultimate goal."
"We've found TBox to be valuable for scanning applications and automating test cases."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Tosca can give us the UI plus the backend mainframe and API testing within one tool."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is it is a completely scriptless automation tool, which I liked a lot. They keep on continuously improving their tools, wherever we are facing any challenges they are able to provide a solution for it. It is easy to learn, everyone can easily read and understand what is happening with the scripts. Any business user or function tester can use the tool efficiently. This is a complete solution package."
"Compared to other tools we have been looking at, you don't have to be a programmer to operate it, though it helps, and it is also a product that can be used by business people."
"The customer service is top-notch."
 

Cons

"The browser based testing needs to be improved."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"GUI interface could be simpler for non-developers."
"Implementing a better integration with Git. It was extremely painful to implement the link from Silk Central to Git."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"At the moment, when we are trying to use this tool, we are finding quite a few compatibility issues between the tool and the applications on the test. We wouldn't consider it perfectly stable for that reason."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help."
"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved as well because it's very expensive."
"So far, all our issues have had to do with our unfamiliarity with the product."
"Not all functions are logical without certain know-how."
"The Test Management options are still weak - improvement is outlined, but not yet visible. I"
"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on the ease of use. There is a steep learning curve. The reporting section could be better and some of the new features could be simplified. Additionally, the user management of the client and the server are confusing. There should not be two."
"I would like a better user interface."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
"We hired a consultant to figure out all the tools in our company and how they fit in our company before we purchased the solution."
"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."
"They are probably more expensive than other comparable tools, but you also get the full suite of testing tools."
"The pricing is high, but altogether it offers you the ability to automate all sorts of applications: desktop, web, mobile, etc."
"The pricing of the solution comes as part of our Tosca bundle."
"It is expensive. There is also the training cost, but it does speed up the process. So, you get a return on investment."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise75
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis Tosca?
The pricing for Tricentis Tosca is extremely high, and I rate it as ten in terms of expense. It is really pricey in the market, making it more suitable for large enterprises rather than small or me...
 

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Orchestrated Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
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 OpenText Silk Test vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.