We performed a comparison between Qualibrate and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."We use the solution’s Test Planning & test Execution Scheduling features, and they are very important. They are easy to work with. We use SAP Solution Manager, and Qualibrate works with it, enabling us to manage all our tests, taking them from Solution Manager directly into Qualibrate."
"What Qualibrate makes very easy to do is to record a process flow. Within five minutes you have a clear document produced by Qualibrate. Instead of using Word, and copying and pasting pictures into it from printscreens, within five minutes what you have was easy to make and it's easy for users to use."
"The most valuable feature is that it's user-friendly."
"The widget's ease of use is the most valuable, which means it allows you or business people to record the automated test scripts. In most cases, it is really good because it is the business people who actually know how the system is being used. The simplicity of the design is valuable, where you can record your transactions, then create your automated scripts. You can automate it at the same time, and the automation features are cool."
"It is the principle functionality that we're leveraging, which really can be defined as recordings and playbacks. So, you record the scripts that you want to execute and you also want to be able to playback. So, these are the features that we are largely leveraging. There are flows and scenarios, and they are the design aspects that fit within the playback and the recording solution. For me, they are the core of Qualibrate, and that's what we're using."
"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 solution is very easy to learn and any non-programmer or manual tester, with little experience in automation, can pick it up quite easily."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"It is easy to maintain and easy to automate. No coding skills are required to automate. It is also easy in terms of transferring knowledge and skills. Many of my team members shifted over the past one and a half years, and there was no big issue with respect to knowledge sharing. It is a good tool that enables me to re-automate my scripts and update my scripts as quickly as possible. Looking at the amount of rework and maintenance activity that we had done for our scripts, it might have been a nightmare with some other scripting tool."
"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."
"The tool can be handled without any knowledge in parameterisation, especially the TestCaseDesign which makes the tool mighty and stable."
"We can also create customized functions. For example, if something isn't supported in Tricentis Tosca Commander, we can create our own function to integrate it with Tosca Commander, so we can utilize it and integrate with the macros."
"What could be improved would be the intuitiveness of the reporting engine. It does have reporting, i.e., a dashboard, but it is preconfigured, predefined KPIs and datasets. That could be improved because the datasets don't have descriptions, so you really need to know what you're doing. Whereas, it would be great if it could have more descriptions and be easy to build your own KPIs."
"There is a module that we would like to have. We would like Qualibrate to design a requirements module so that we can design our testing, our flows, and our scenarios based on our actual requirements. Right now, we're doing that, but we're having to do it outside of Qualibrate. For example, in Excel, we might have a list of 50, 60, or 70 different requirements and combinations of tests that need to be executed, and since that module doesn't exist in Qualibrate, we're doing it offline. We have already vocalized that wishlist to them, and they have acknowledged it, but I have no idea when they're going to get around to deploying something like that. It is probably number one on our list."
"Not everything in SAP works well with Qualibrate. There is a development tool called xpath and you have to program it. We always thought it wouldn't be necessary to program it with Qualibrate, that everything could be solved by Qualibrate without programming, but you have to program some things. Using xpath is more complicated, and not easy for everybody. It would be helpful if there were a no-code solution for this."
"What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system."
"We had an issue with SAP when using PDF forms. That was something that was not supported by Qualibrate, but we solved that issue by choosing another solution. That was the only wish we had with Qualibrate."
"It needs better integration with JIRA."
"ScratchBook execution needs to be improved as Tosca crashes multiple times."
"A disadvantage of Tricentis Tosca is that you have to customize it according to your need, during the early stages of the software, particularly during upstream testing, before system and unit testing."
"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."
"In terms of areas for improvement, Tricentis has a variety of tools, even its test management tool called qTest. Tricentis Tosca does have integration with different Tricentis tools, but the integration is geared towards a larger organization perspective. For very small organizations that have minimal licenses, the integration needs to be improvised. For example, I belong to a smaller organization that has only one license, so the capability that the tool provides for integration isn't sufficient because my company needs to have separate workspaces. When Tricentis Tosca is going to be running, it is going to use that license, but my company wants another separate workspace to record, relay, and test. This is what my team has been struggling with, and the mechanism is probably there, but that needs more time and investigation, so I can't say that I'm one hundred percent certain that Tricentis Tosca, in terms of integration for a smaller organization is insufficient. Another area for improvement is that Tricentis Tosca is currently just a Windows-based tool which affects the market because nowadays, Windows isn't the only operating system, for example, there's also Apple or IOS that's moving much faster than Windows."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on its mobile automation solution."
"Not being able to mask test data in relation to testing data management, in my opinion, is also a limitation."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
Earn 20 points
Qualibrate is ranked 35th in Functional Testing Tools while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. Qualibrate is rated 8.8, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Qualibrate writes "Reduces our testing time significantly, enabling us to release more frequently". 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 ". Qualibrate is most compared with , whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Testim.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.
