We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Mobile App Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"As a codeless automation tool, the product offers a user-friendly experience without requiring extensive coding knowledge. Users can easily handle various applications, including web applications, SAP applications, Windows applications, and even Salesforce applications, without manual coding."
"It's stable and reliable."
"I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers."
"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."
"You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues."
"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."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."
"If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it."
"There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"Very difficult to get information about licensing costs."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on its mobile automation solution."
"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. The support and licensing cost for it also need improvement. The tool also needs cloud support, as it's currently on-premises only."
"It can be quite expensive."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
"I have found that some of the functions could be missed in the solution for new users. They are not obviously present."
"It needs better integration with JIRA."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 4th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 46 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Mobile App Testing Tools with 97 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". 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 ". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish, OpenText UFT One and Selenium HQ, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Selenium HQ. See our Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Mobile App 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.