We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Tricentis Tosca 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."The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"The integration is very good."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"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."
"The scalability is a valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca."
"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."
"The use of automation is most valuable."
"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."
"Good use in Agile workshops, where the person needs to conceptualize the tests before the developer provides the complete application interface."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
"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."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"The solution is slow."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"The user management could improve in Tricentis Tosca because it is confusing. It would be better to have it in one place. Having to add it to the cloud and to a specific project can be a mess."
"Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved."
"Running the regression – if multiple lists are executed at once or if a list contains 200+ tests, it’s a pain to stop the execution."
"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."
"Tricentis Tosca could improve on the ease of use. There is a steep learning curve. The reporting section could be better and some of the new features could be simplified. Additionally, the user management of the client and the server are confusing. There should not be two."
"Very difficult to get information about licensing costs."
"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 reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". 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 ". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Testim. See our BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca 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.
