We performed a comparison between IBM DevOps Test UI 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 is the UI component tester."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"We have multiple applications, and it supports parallel execution. It has mobile automation."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is the Tosca Commander. Functionality is another thing I find most valuable in the solution."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the Salesforce scanning. There are two scanning for Salesforce applications. There is Salesforce scanning and normal application scanning. Object identification has been really useful in Tricentis Tosca."
"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."
"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."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"It would be of great help if they can fix the loading or performance issues. Sometimes, when I create the test case folder and test cases, it feels like it has loading or performance issues. When passing the objects, we can't sometimes find the exact element. We need to find out that exact location and just give the path for that, and then it works. In the pipeline, when creating Jenkins, we create the list execution for passing the execution list to the commander. I feel it is a bit late, by a fraction of seconds. I first thought it could be my mistake or a setting issue, but I worked on that, and it's not a mistake or a setting issue."
"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."
"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."
"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."
"The Test Management options are still weak - improvement is outlined, but not yet visible. I"
"The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars."
"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."
"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."
IBM DevOps Test UI is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. IBM DevOps Test UI is rated 7.2, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM DevOps Test UI writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". 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 ". IBM DevOps Test UI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Selenium HQ, HCL OneTest, Worksoft Certify and OpenText UFT One, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Testim. See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression 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.