Tricentis Tosca Reviews

This is a complete Test Automation solution of our Enterprise Legacy system, which has many technical peripherals. It provides complete automation for apps/services of all domains and technology integration. Although not yet implemented on our site, features like Orchestrated Service Virtualization and Exploratory Testing excite me and have a huge potential for us.

• Helped us to lay a strong foundation for model based test automation
• Increased throughput
• Improved quality
• Better cost optimization
• Faster time to market

• Licensing/Pricing: Licensing needs to be packaged and not too granular at the component level.

• Cloud or Service Offering: It's a licensed installation. I am not sure if it can be used in the mode of "product as a service" offering
• Web Interface: To avoid client installations for certain features

I have been using this for more than 7-8 years of generic use. For the last few years, I have extended its use as a strategic tool for test modernization, automation, and transformation.

There have been no stability issues in particular.

There have been no scalability issues as of now.

Technical support is very good. We have been supported by a very professional technical team from the vendor.

We did use different solutions. We moved to Tosca because:

• It offers a complete automation solution for all of our applications streams.
• Other technologies were unsupported and fell short on our requirements

We are also in process of moving to Tosca for other functions.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward.

I would like to see some competitive pricing and licensing models.

We evaluated HPE's QC and our existing tools.

If you are up to end-to-end test automation, then please give Tosca a try.

Our primary use case of Tosca is for the automation of web-based applications. We currently have five clients who have deployed this solution. I am the practice head and we have good capabilities in this tool.

The solution is very user-friendly and the low code automation is great and very helpful.

It was very difficult to get information about licensing costs. None of that information is readily available. For customers with a smaller budget, it would be helpful if Tricentis could offer options for smaller organizations to be able to use the tool. We've also found that customer support is lacking. 

We've been testing the trial version of this solution for the past several months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Reaching out to customer support is challenging and they could improve on that. 

Neutral

We previously used other tools but our clients switched to Tricentis because of its ease of use.

The initial setup was easy.

This is an expensive solution. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

My primary use case for Tricentis Tosca is SAP testing.

I'm using Tricentis Tosca as part of test automation, so it reduces the test execution time, and this has improved our organization. This is the main advantage of the tool, compared to doing it manually.

All the features available now in Tricentis Tosca are valuable.

One thing to improve in Tricentis Tosca is that it's not compatible with Excel based forms. Another area for improvement is that the tool is not compatible with OpenText applications. OpenText is a company which provides multiple applications.

There's also an issue with the support for Tricentis Tosca. If they don't provide support within a faster timeframe, then you will wait for the solution, and you'll lose, e.g. whatever you're gaining from the tool, you'll lose, because of the delayed support.

Tricentis Tosca also needs some improvement, and this is why my rating for it is only eight out of ten, e.g. it needs to have more compatibility to be able to take advantage of its multiple features.

The tool also supports on-premises deployment only, and it needs to elevate to cloud deployment. It should be easily accessible by anyone, and this is currently not the case. Other competitor tools, or most of the competitor tools, have moved to cloud, except Tricentis Tosca.

The licensing cost for the tool also needs improvement.

If these changes were to be made, then I could give Tricentis Tosca the perfect score: 10 out of 10.

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for six years.

The stability and reliability of Tricentis Tosca is just 60% for me.

We were able to contact technical support for Tricentis Tosca, and they gave us a delayed response. In order to get our problem solved, we had to wait for one month.

The initial setup for Tricentis Tosca was a mix of both straightforward and complex. If you are using just one component, the setup was straightforward, if you wanted to integrate the tool with the multiple components, then the setup becomes complex.

The installation was standard in terms of how long it took to complete, e.g. one week. If there was integration, it could be completed in three weeks.

I've seen a return on investment from the tool, but only when it was used long term, e.g. in more than three years time.

The licensing cost for Tricentis Tosca is expensive. It has multiple features, but to use all of its features you have to pay for additional licenses.

Tricentis Tosca is a testing tool, so we can implement it in any software projects.

The tool is only applicable for on-premises deployment. Currently, it's not possible to deploy it via public or private cloud.

I'm using version 15 of Tricentis Tosca.

I did the deployment of the tool myself, and didn't use an integrator, reseller, or consultant. One person can deploy Tricentis Tosca.

We have 1000+ people in our environment who are using the tool.

Product-wise, I'm rating Tricentis Tosca eight out of ten. Service or support-wise, my rating for it is six out of ten.

Tricentis Tosca is a tool used for system and application testing.

The advantage of using Tricentis Tosca is that we can get started with automation without much investment on solution development, with it following a keyword-driven approach. We have the actions and verifications readily available, so you can get started on the Tricentis Tosca conversion from the first day of training, and this is the advantage we have observed from the tool.

I also like that it is a simple tool, in terms of system testing, though there are other tools now that are good competitors for Tricentis Tosca, e.g. Katalon Studio.

A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software. Sometimes this happens when you're not on the system testing phase, but you're very close to development, e.g. more on the upstream testing, before system testing, unit testing, etc.

For example, you have to inject something as a precondition to the solution on the test, so you have to do some presetting, you have to write some code to it, and you have to make some conditions for upstream testing. Tricentis Tosca is not recommended in that stage, but it's definitely better for system testing, with it being keyword-driven and you have the keywords readily available, especially if you compare it with other tools such as Micro Focus and TestComplete.

Though I'm not currently working with Tricentis Tosca, e.g. I don't have a project utilizing the solution, I've had experience with it in the past year.

We evaluated Micro Focus, TestComplete, and Katalon Studio.

I am in the QA side, and I have almost 20 years of experience in QA. I'm doing all the automations. My experience with commercial tools are customer specific, e.g. if the customer wants to use a specific tool. I have experience on object-based tools and other types, on the commercial side. We use OneSource libraries and the custom frameworks, so that's where I have more experience, compared to commercial tools.

I don't have any current projects with Tricentis Tosca, but my company has a partnership with Tricentis. I'm not in the delivery team, e.g. I'm on the CoE team. Our application testing is more on digitally managing application drivers, so our scope on application testing is minimal. However, everyone's going digital nowadays, e.g. there's the remote setting and other things to come, so we utilize browser-based solutions, testing, mobile, etc.

I'm part of the CoE team where our work involves solutioning, initial designs, and choosing the right tools. We don't get into the product and use the same tool for a long time, in particular, we do a POC. With Tricentis Tosca, we have asked our teams to do a POC using it, because there is nothing more important than learning the tool, so that it can be easily understandable. Based on customer demand, we have done a few POCs for the tool, so our team isn't really involved in the full lifecycle of a project.

Katalon Studio is very similar to Tricentis Tosca, and price-wise, it's lower. This is why I don't compare Tricentis Tosca with TestComplete. I compare the tool with Katalon Studio, which is an open source robot that's similar to Tricentis Tosca, but because it's a free rule, you cannot have everything from it when compared to Tricentis Tosca.

My experience or my inputs on what to add to this solution, or what I'd like to see from it in the next release, would not be great, because our team is not into applications that much. Our scope of testing the applications is minimal. We are more into the panel-based devices and smart devices, e.g. POS (point of sale) or Point of Care devices in the medical field, or input devices, aeronautical flight attendance panels, etc. Those are the areas we are involved in, so they are purely embedded domains.

I'm giving Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten rating.

The best feature is the speed in which we are able to get our automation up and running. We had an unorganized library of regression test cases. We have, within the first six months, been able to automate 85% on our critical business processes and we have been able to maintain that while keeping our BCR ratio down. We have also seen about 234 defects per month in production to less than 8.

We are able to allocate more resources on projects instead of maintenance. Our maintenance has dwindled down to two employees and we have the confidence to try and other things and explore other units.

The only thing I am not happy about is not so much the product, but it's that we don’t a good way to control licenses. Sometimes people are using licenses at their desk and when they go home, they still have the license. There is no good way to control this. When we have an issue that someone tries to log in and they can’t, it’s down to the fact that someone has walked away with 3 licenses and they aren’t using them.

I've used it for one year.

There we're no issues with the deployment.

It’s been absolutely perfect for our organization. For a year and a half, we have been constantly running regressions and the results have been 100% consistent. If we do miss something and it misses production, it’s only due to a manual oversight and has nothing to do with the solution. When we follow our process, it’s consistent.

I am about to test it in a really big way. So far it has scaled to my needs. I am taking it organization- and vendor-wide in the next 6 months. Let’s see what happens when we bring a Cognizant on.

I would say it’s excellent. We have the best support ever. They have just gone over to the Magic Quadrant. I hope they are scalable with that move and we still get the same support.

We have used previous versions so this was down to an upgrade.

The use of the data sheet is not as clear-cut as we might think it would be. Some grasped it quickly and some did not. It depends on skill level whether or it is straightforward or complex. When it clicked, it worked well. It took a little longer than we would have liked.

I would say, take the training and go in to the product and use it the way they recommend to use it. They trained as and it works well. Some listen and kindly say we will use it the Tricentis way and don’t, they end up seeing problems. If I were to make a recommendation, Tricentis is as the top of the list.

Business dynamic steering and table steering.

For example, you can make templates and share them with storage elements. We use it in our main, regressive, HTML, and web-case tests.

At the moment, none. In the latest version I don’t see much room for improvement.

I've used it for six years.

In the past there were.

The product is stable; no problems with stability features.

We had in the past, but those are gone in the latest versions. In the beginning there were problems with scaling up, but those are gone as well.

We had QA Windrunner, which was running out of its maintenance lifecycle. Also, the product wasn’t very good as it caused problems, was only a tool for testing automation, and we needed a tool that could be used for several purposes like reporting, putting in requests, and data storage. Testsuite accomplishes what a lot of different tools did before. Now, three or so tools are no longer needed, and our testing is all unified in TOSCA.

It's very good.

It's very good.

It was implemented through a vendor team – our team members had done a TOSCA certification so they worked together.

The best way to look into the solution, you have to experience things for yourself. Have technical support from the beginning so that you have guidance early on.

We are primarily using this product as an automation tool, for regression, and as a revision tool. 

Using the automation tool, I can transfer test cases that are being done manually to ones that are automated. After about 30 such instances, I use the regression system from the suite to create all possible combinations of test cases to try with the new version. This gives us an overview of how the software is performing. Also, when major updates take place, we re-run all of the regression tests to make sure that it still conforms to the requirements.

The automation testing functionality is very powerful.

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 graphical interface means that you don't have to write any code.

The interface is very organized. You can find folders and settings for everything that you need, and you can easily connect things together.  

I would like to see better integration with other testing tools. There is full integration with Selenium and having this with other tools would be good.

Integration with other programming languages would also be helpful.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for the past three years.

I have not really found many problems or bugs when using this product, so stability has not been an issue.

Tricentis Tosca is very scalable. You can easily move from a small test suite to a larger test suit, which I think is pretty good. We about 100 users in the organization.

I have not been in touch with technical support from the vendor.

I also have experience with Selenium HQ, Katalon Studio, and Ranorex.

Our organization is broken into separate sections and there is a team for installation and configuration that handled the deployment. As I am not part of that team, I am unable to judge the complexity of the setup.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to make use of the extensive library that they have. It is a good collection of training videos and documentation, and I would advise everybody to go through these materials. They are really helpful and it will allow them to learn much faster, bringing them to the point where they can use it to its full potential.

In summary, I am really comfortable with this tool, I haven't had many problems, and it's sufficient for our work. In the three years that I have been working with it, whenever I've needed something, I've been able to find it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

• Dynamic test case creation: Tosca lets you create automated test cases in no time. You can also convert your manual test cases into automated in a matter of seconds.
• Optimize, manage and automate: It lets you jot down your requirements, design test cases, automate and analyse your test results within one GUI.
• Scriptless automation:Testers can test without worrying about writing code.
• Supports both GUI as well as non-UI testing.
• Test case design: Really lets you think about your test approach and strategy, It lets you automatically generate all the possible (and required) permutations and combinations of the functionality to be tested.

We had this huge customer application (Java based) which needed to be tested end to end. Tosca let us execute around 400 test cases overnight. Hence, it saved a lot of time and brought value for our - and the vendor's :) - esteemed client.

Tricentis has vast and helpful documentation, including the Tosca manuals, along with a detailed description of each section that also contains various tips and techniques. Along with this documentation Tricentis has provided some videos, which are really helpful and help us understand the concept very quickly (and if we want to go into detail, then we can always refer to the detailed manual later).

It would be great if there are more video tutorials on the vendor's support website, at least for commonly used functionalities.

It's been over five years now; have been using it since version 7.6.

I have not encountered any deployment issues in my project.

I have not yet encountered any stability issues.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

The vendors' videos and webinars are of great help, so I would like them to keep coming up with more.