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."
"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."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"The use of automation is most valuable."
"The solution has plenty of features compared to other solutions."
"I face no challenges or stability issues."
"With one click, it will scan all the elements on the screen, so that the user can select the required elements for automation tests."
"One notable feature is its ability to handle negative XPath healing processes. If one XPath fails, Tosca can utilize backup XPaths to ensure test cases do not fail due to locator issues, thereby focusing on identifying application-side issues, which is the ultimate goal."
"The solution is script-less, so you don't need IT knowledge to use the solution in an operational way. This is the most valuable feature. It's also only one of two or three tools that can do good automation on SAP, and in my opinion, it's the best of those."
"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."
"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."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"I would like to see better integration with other testing tools."
"I have found that some of the functions could be missed in the solution for new users. They are not obviously present."
"Tricentis Tosca's performance could be better. Sometimes when we are remapping or when it is loading it can take a lot of time. There are free solutions that have better performance in this area."
"It requires some coding customization that requires expertise."
"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."
"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."
"There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."
"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 9th in API Testing Tools with 30 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 2nd in API Testing Tools with 96 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". 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 ". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Fortify on Demand, 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.