We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is the Tosca Commander. Functionality is another thing I find most valuable in the solution."
"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."
"I face no challenges or stability issues."
"The tool can be handled without any knowledge in parameterisation, especially the TestCaseDesign which makes the tool mighty and stable."
"The reporting is really nice."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"The mainframe testing and UI automation are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
"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."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on its mobile automation solution."
"What needs to be improved in Tricentis Tosca is its centralized repository mechanism because it's not as flexible. The repository in the solution where you store the data and the script for test automation is quite an old-fashioned mechanism that could be improved."
"More and more artificial intelligence (AI) is coming in. So, some amount of AI to create natural language processing (NLP)-based test cases and manage defects would be very helpful. This is because the technologies have evolved in the last five to six months, so there is a potential opportunity there."
"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."
"I would like a better user interface."
"They can make it more stable. I have used this tool for SAP applications. They have an alliance with SAP, and it mostly worked fine, but there were a few glitches. However, we got the required support from the Tricentis team. They are coming up with their new versions and upgrades with respect to how the Tricentis systems as cloud applications are updated, and it would be good if they have a robust accelerator pack."
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 9th in API Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 2nd in API Testing Tools with 21 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Easy to use and understand with multiple types of testing on offer". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Efficient operations, continuous improvements, and robust features". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.