Tricentis Tosca Reviews

We use this product for testing and trying to make solutions work.

This product contains a lot of functionality.

It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting. I like it because everything is available in one place.

When people start using this product, there is a learning curve. For people who were using another product, whether an open-source one like TestComplete or a commercial product, they are unable to use this solution immediately because it is much different. You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others.

When they developed the tool, they created their own rules and you need training for the people who will be using it.

We have been using Tricentis Tosca for about six months.

I would say it's a stable solution.

I have not used to to the point where I needed to scale it.

Our entire team is using it, which is more than five people.

I have been in contact with technical support and they have been very responsive. I can't complain.

I have also been using TestComplete. It is a simpler product to use and I was learning through using it. I didn't have to do any training. There were points where I needed to check the documentation concerning limitations

The initial setup was very straightforward. I did not find it to be complex and I don't remember having any problems. There was nothing spectacular about it.

Overall, the product works fine. With respect to errors in the product, there is nothing in particular that comes to mind. If there were issues then I was always able to work my way around them.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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.

We primarily use the solution for testing. The company's businesses are tax-free payments. We're testing the company applications around the aspects of its tax-free payment systems.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the extremely fast setup. You can really get up and running within a very small window of time. It's great.

We like the fact that it works across mobile, desktop, web, and APIs. Due to this, the solution has a broad range of applications.

The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking.

The solution should work to try to lessen the cost of the solution. Right now, using it is costly for companies such as ours.

We'd like to see improvement in shared repositories. The problem with the shared repository is this: as it gets bigger, as we create more test cases, and due to this, we are experiencing issues.

I've been dealing with the solution for just over a year.

The stability of the solution is excellent. It's very reliable. We don't seem to have issues with bugs and glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite good.

The scalability of the solution is very good. We can expand it if we need to The solution doesn't give us any problems in that sense.

The technical support of the solution is very good. We've very satisfied with the level of service provided to us.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was not complex at all. It took us less than a month to have something up and running. It was very easy, and one of the solution's big selling points for our organization.

We're simply customers of Tosca. We don't have any professional relationship with the company.

The pricing of the solution is quite expensive. It's definitely not one of the cheapest options. It's very pricey.

On top of the already expensive pricing, there are add-ons that help with the basic test suite, and you have to pay more for those.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'd recommend people do a proof of concept (POC) around Tosca and compare it to other available tools. That way, an organization will know if the solution is right for them without investing too much time into everything.

We use it for test automation and manual tests, and we use it as our central repository for all test cases.  Our test cases focus on front end testing and back-end testing.  Tosca BI is what we use for back-end testing.  

We also have built out RPA processes that run in Tosca in conjunction with DEX.

We're currently going through an upgrade of a system here, in-house, and Tosca has allowed us to do more testing compared to what we were previously able to do. In the past, it would just take too much time for humans to do. This additional testing that we're doing, which provides additional test coverage for the upgrade, would take a couple of individuals three weeks to do, and we're able to do it within 24 hours with Tosca.

Also, the solution enables us to run the entire regression test suite, immaterial of where a change has been made. We're able to run all our regression tests at one time. We do not have CI/CD set up yet, so it still has to be manually kicked off. For example, for the in-house upgrade I mentioned, most of what they're building is regression test cases because we want to make our upgrades faster and we want to do them more frequently. So as the users are building out the test cases, they're also creating the regression execution list. They can build upon that and then run that when they need to. And then all they do is do the analysis of the execution.

Tosca is also slowly starting to remove redundant test cases. We're working with the users to build better test cases and remove those redundancies as well. This really helps because we have the central repository which allows us to share everybody's test cases and to reuse the test cases globally. We have delivery teams in Edinburgh and in the Netherlands as well as here in the US. It really allows for that single collaboration and for reduction and reuse of test cases. We're still analyzing how this has affected our testing efficiency. That's one of the reasons we're upgrading to 12.3. We want the Tricentis Analytics to help paint that picture a little bit better for us.

We are starting to see the test speed increase a little bit. Looking, again, at that in-house upgrade's tests, if we had manual testers doing it, it would take a couple of weeks, and now we can execute test cases in 24 hours. Another team just completed some test automation test cases that take two minutes to run. When they first ran them they ran into errors and issues which were legitimate issues. The developers fixed them and they ran the tests again and found some more errors. They went back to developers. The whole time it took to resolve things was about 20 minutes. That is a huge improvement over how things worked before. It would have taken hours if it was manually tested, verified, etc.

Finally, we have BAs who have been trained on Tosca, people who have picked it up fairly quickly with little background in development or coding, and they've been able to get up and running on it fairly quickly. We would like to get to the business to be able to help control testing as well, but we're not there yet. We are using exploratory testing, but we're not 100 percent using that quite yet.

The most valuable features are 

• Tosca BI 
• Tosca Commander.

Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems. 

Tosca Commander lets any test cases that are UI driven validate, and tests the UI and expected results.

Also, the nice thing about the model's solution is that we're able to build out the modules within Tosca, to facilitate ease of maintaining the test cases. It allows one spot to do an update and that flows through all the test cases that need to be updated.

The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades. Going through this current upgrade, we were delayed a month because we are using a third-party tool. It's called Tosca Connect by Tasktop. When this latest upgrade broke that relationship between the two, it took Tricentis a month to come back with a workable solution. To me, that resulted in critical customer impact and it took way too long for them to resolve. Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint.

4 years

The stability seems pretty robust. We've come across some minor issues, but I think you'll have that with any kind of thing with any software. Those issues were the result of a combination of the environment and not having the knowledge of other things that would help resolve them.

In terms of scalability, one of the things I do is challenge people to prove that it doesn't work. It has yet to be proven to me that it doesn't work with something. We've always found a way to be able to do test automation with it.

We have developers and BAs using the tool. We have 16 delivery teams and there are an average of seven people on each team. We require two people for maintenance of the solution. They are test automation engineers. If you're talking about maintaining test cases, everybody on the delivery team is involved. It's in their goals to maintain their test cases for what they deliver, and that includes developers and BAs.

Every day, Tosca is being used more and more. Part of our digital transformation is that we keep growing the tool base and what the test cases are.

Tosca's technical support is mediocre. I've worked with better support. The reason I say that is because, here in the US, if we put in a support ticket, that ticket usually goes to the European support and there's that time lag. Something that could be responded to within an hour or two can have a 24-hour gap until we get any response.

Also, sometimes we run into some who are technical and then we run into support members who aren't very technical, and who just give a canned answer. That's not very helpful. There's definitely room for improvement in terms of their support.

We used Selenium before Tosca. One of the reasons we decided to look at other tools was that, with Selenium, the maintenance of the scripts started becoming higher. The more and more that test cases were built, the higher the maintenance cost was and we started seeing a diminishing return as a result. 

Also, you really can't do database testing, for the most part. There are ways around that limitation, but it just doesn't work very well with Selenium. 

From a reporting standpoint, you really can't produce robust reports like you can within Tosca. 

Finally, the infrastructure with Selenium is a little bit more challenging and there's really no built-in test management with Selenium as well.

On a scale of one to ten, with one being straightforward and ten being complex, the setup was around six or seven. It wasn't completely straightforward but it wasn't totally complex either. It just needed some insight from Tricentis to make sure things were being done correctly.

The first deployment took about a week. We then went through an upgrade where we used their consulting service as well, because that was when they changed how the licensing was done and the license server. That took about two weeks to do. With this latest upgrade, we're going on our fifth week now. It's taken us a little longer because of that issue that we uncovered.

Our implementation strategy was a global implementation, where we empowered all delivery teams to be able to use Tosca. We set up the application servers and the repository in a global data center and then we pushed out Tosca Commander to all the delivery teams so they could do test automation and manual testing as well.

We used a Tricentis consultant for the first setup and deployment. They were fantastic. They're very knowledgeable, they're great at what they do, they know the product inside and out, and it really helped speed things up. 

ROI is one of the reasons we're trying to get Tricentis Analytics set up, so we can provide factual data on the test cases and the return. We have KPIs set up to help us with that.

We paid upfront for the licenses and maintenance and we pay the maintenance fees as we move forward, yearly. There are no additional costs that I am aware of.

We evaluated SmartBear, HPE QTP (now UFT), QuerySurge, and Alteryx.

It was very apparent that Tosca was an all-in-one solution. We could do database testing, UI, and API testing. The others focus on one area. HPE and SmartBear focus on things such as UI/UX interface-type testing, while Alteryx and QuerySurge focus on backend database testing. Tricentis encompasses all that and that's why we selected them.

If you're going to have somebody come in and help set up, don't go with a third-party vendor, but have Tricentis consultants come in, do training, and help set up. It's worth the extra money to have them come in and do right, versus a third-party that might not know everything. That was our experience. We tried the third-party route to help us, and we immediately saw that it was not the right way to go. That's when we went to Tricentis themselves to come in and help us.

The biggest lesson I've learned is more connected to the tool's adoption. If people have been doing the same thing for over ten years, it tends to be a little bit hard for them to switch over because they want to do things the way they've always been doing them. But the tool itself is fairly simple. It's a pretty solid tool.

There are a few ways to overcome the resistance to new technology. But it's really about creating urgency around why the tool is important to the company and why people need to adopt it. We've done lunch-and-learns to help people understand it. We also champion any success stories with the tool, through newsletters that go out. Sometimes, it's just about bringing in new people with the right mindset.

We've slowly been increasing our rate of testing automation using Tosca. We did a digital transformation with SAFe Agile, and then with adopting test automation. So the tool-adoption piece has taken a little bit longer. We're not quite where we want to be yet. We're still building on it. Tosca covers about 50 percent of our test cases at this point. The solution hasn't reduced our cost of testing yet. We're still a little immature in this process.

In terms of delivering more features for release, we are watching features but we're not there yet. We're just not mature enough to have those hard facts to help us state that this is helping complete more features. From a defects standpoint, we're trying to get a better handle on how defects are captured here, because before there wasn't a concise, approved process on defects. Everybody did their own thing and I'm pretty sure things fell through the cracks. People weren't identifying defects as defects. That's another one of the things we're trying to get better at.

Tricentis keeps building on BI and Tosca itself, and they're just getting better and better every time. A lot of the things they're focusing on are the right things.

We use this solution for risk-based testing in conjunction with test optimization and test automation.

Our testing landscape ranges from web applications to mobile applications to mainframe to PDF. The tool takes care of most of the testing requirements with relatively minimal effort.

Tricentis Tosca has evolved from being a functional test automation tool to becoming a Continuous Testing platform. It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority. 

It has also enabled teams to optimize risk coverage and enabled them to test more wisely.

Risk-based testing, test optimization, and support for over one hundred technologies are some of the most important capabilities of the platform. Many may argue that the same can be achieved by other tools as well, but not all within the same platform. The ease of maintainability is also a differentiating factor.

Even though the platform has been continuously evolving, there is room for improvement. For example:

• Test reporting hasn't been as impressive as the other components of this platform.
• Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation.

This is a very stable solution.

This solution is easily scalable.

I would say that they have decent support. They can be contacted via live chat, email, and online incident forms.

I was using Selenium WebDriver a few years ago. 

I switched to Tricentis Tosca because of its methodology and support for more than one hundred technologies.

The initial setup is straightforward, provided that the consultants from the company are involved.

We used a mix of both in-house staff and consultants for our implementation.

Tricentis Tosca may be relatively on the higher side in terms of pricing, but their sales rep can give pretty decent deals when asked.

I evaluated other solutions including both Selenium and QTP.

For organizations who want to aim for a unified continuous testing platform, and are willing to pay for it, Tricentis Tosca can be a decent investment.

We primarily use this solution in a mixed environment having web and desktop applications, integrating with each other and over an API Gateway. API based and Financial Services portal testing created using modern technology using C# and ReactJS.

- Brought a good environment of test automation

- Allowed a significant increase in Continuous Integration

- Great User Interface and ease of checking all your artifacts of Testing.

- Makes optimal use of Model-based Test practice in getting Object-references from the application.

- Script-less, so less maintenance headache for non-technical users also.

- Drag and drop functionality to create and re-use your Test Cases

- Excellent re-use of Excel functionality for formulas and functions.

- Conditions which let the test case branch off from the Template. Helps work out different scenarios for data.

- Has been tried out on SAP, Oracle Apps, and IBM COGNOS BI applications. With a few tweaks works well with these applications.

- IF and LOOP statements introduced with the latest version.

- Improved performance of Web-Based Tests. WHILE LOOP and IF made better and more responsive with added error recovery options.

- Intuitive based options available, along with a rudimentary record and play functionality.

- Next version will even have the visualization tools required to see the interconnections between the TCD and the Test Cases, along with the workflow in the TCD and Tests.

- New and improved visualization for multiple browsers and a totally new Wizard with TBox out of Box support has been added to the (v9.2) of TOSCA Commander.

- Access to Business Intelligence (BI) features of comparing a DB to another one, also have been added as plugins.

- Access to an Analytical Engine to view and get reports from the Test Runs.

- Version 13 has also brought in BI testing and improvements on SAP Test scenarios

- Upgrades to the newer version if extra Add-ins are installed sometimes causes weird issues.

- Needs a UI to be open and present when running the tests. Cannot visit the DOM like in Selenium.

- Needs a UI to visualize the test case development.

I have used it for the past nine years.

None seen as such, except it has a reliance on the Network for Licenses. If the network is lost, then the license will expire and crash/close the application.

The scalability depends on the Licensing model you take up.

Customer Service:

Excellent almost 16x5 service with issue resolution within a given 24-hour time frame.

Technical Support:

- Great Customer Support, technical from the first step.

I have been using HP QTP and Selenium for Test Automation. Switch was mainly due to Team constraints and management wanting to try a new tool which is easier for the Business Analysts also to collaborate with.

Setup is simple but requires learning of the tool and how it does things before you can optimally use it.

We had an in-house implementation.

We have seen an exceptionally good ROI, as we reduced the number of Tests from 4000 to around 89 scenario's which can be run in an automated manner with additional data (so in actuality we have around 1.4M tests, which can theoretically be run without human intervention). We have a full-stack CI pipeline for running these along with JIRA (requirement gathering and test results per Story), to the final TeamCity run for each check-in to the Dev branch.

Pricing is steep if you go for the premium model. My advice would be to buy a mix of licenses, depending on the need. The Tricentis Sales are rather good at helping you with this, once you give the intent to buy. They are not just shoving you the highest premium toy/license.

I evaluated TestComplete, HP UFT ALM, Selenium / SpecFlow / Cucumber.

Take the online training on Udemy before you confirm the intent to buy it.

We are using Tricentis Tosca for test automation.

Tricentis Tosca has completely met our requirements. It has benefitted our organization.

The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are all the test automation functionality. It is a full-scale automation tool.

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for over five years.

The stability of Tricentis Tosca is excellent.

We are using Tricentis Tosca at 100 percent capacity.

The support we received from Tricentis Tosca was good, but it can improve.

I rate the support from Tricentis Tosca a three out of five.

I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five.

I rate Tricentis Tosca a nine out of ten.

Tosca can work with a wide range of technological solutions. So Tosca is not just a replacement for open-source products. It's integrated with different technologies, desktop applications, package solutions like SAP, and mobile applications.

Right now, I can't think of any areas where Tosca can improve because we are not yet that experienced with delivering services based on Tosca.

I've been using Tosca for nearly three years.

We haven't implemented Tosca at a large enough scale to really comment on that. 

We haven't had any major problems with the product, but when we've had issues, Tricentis support has been generally responsive.

The implementation process is manageable and easy enough. It's an example of a good implementation approach.

Primarily I'm dealing with customers looking for a cheap solution, and they are willing to try open-source automation solutions. So from this perspective, the price of Tosca is not as competitive. And these alternatives are on the radar of larger companies that are investing in the delivery of their products. So Tosca is not penetrating the market as much because of the license prices.

I would rate Tosca eight out of 10. The only disadvantage is the high price. Still, I would say it's worth trying because the barrier is low to implement automation, and it works with a broad scope of technologies and applications.