We performed a comparison between Tricentis Tosca and Zeenyx AscentialTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"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 use of automation is most valuable."
"We like the fact that it works across mobile, desktop, web, and APIs. Due to this, the solution has a broad range of applications."
"What I find valuable is that Tricentis is always refining the test methodology. They listen to feedback from the analysts about what the testing tool should do, and then Tricentis always implements it. So all the necessary testing functions are already implemented in their tools."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"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."
"Making it more stable would be good because we get around 90% stability."
"It requires some coding customization that requires expertise."
"Might have a learning curve, as it does not follow the traditional Record-Play functionality, but tests have to be built from requirements or Agile story cards."
"The solution is expensive."
"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... Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint."
"Tosca's reporting features could be better. Tricentis had a reporting tool called Analytics, but it didn't function properly after they reworked it. After that, they tried a new approach with key-tracing, and that didn't work."
"I would like to see better integration with other testing tools."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Does not require coding experience to use and comes with productivity and time-saving features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration". Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Testim, whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with SmartBear TestComplete. See our Tricentis Tosca vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.