Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.1%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 18.9%, up from 17.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.
PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"Selenium integration."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are all the test automation functionality. It is a full-scale automation tool."
"The scriptless automation tool is one of the important features."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the Salesforce scanning. There are two scanning for Salesforce applications. There is Salesforce scanning and normal application scanning. Object identification has been really useful in Tricentis Tosca."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"To me, what stands out the most about Tricentis Tosca is that even if I'm not a technical tester, I could pick up on how to use it very quickly because of the mechanisms of the tool, for example, its scanning mechanism. I'm not so technical, but I'm able to maneuver through Tricentis Tosca and derive capability. It's a user-friendly tool. It's not very complex."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the ease of use, you do not need to program if you do not want to."
"Tricentis Tosca is a codeless tool, making it easy for everyone to understand the transition of how to develop scenarios or test cases."
 

Cons

"I would like to see better dashboards."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"The solution’s customer support should be improved."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"In scenarios where two of our engineers work on the same task, merging codes is a bit difficult."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"Technical support used to be better. It is now a bit difficult to reach out compared to previous experiences."
"The document object model or some aspects of it has a bit of a learning curve."
"Needs a UI to visualize the test case development."
"There should be ease of data manipulation within automation test cases."
"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"Pricing for Tricentis Tosca could be improved because it's very expensive."
"There is an annual cost for Tricentis."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five."
"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."
"There are different types of licenses: enterprise or professional. The cost varies."
"The tool is quite expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
18%
Computer Software Company
12%
Retailer
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to imp...
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...
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...
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

OATS
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
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 Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.