We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Tricentis Tosca based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: After comparing all parameters, Selenium HQ seems to be the more popular choice, since it is open-source and has very good documentation and community-based support available.
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"The solution is very easy to implement."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are all the test automation functionality. It is a full-scale automation tool."
"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."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool."
"The low code is the best feature."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Tosca Commander."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"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."
"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."
"Tricentis Tosca’s technical support could be improved."
"It can be quite expensive."
"The product needs to improve its pricing. It also needs to improve the infrastructure and DEX agent setup."
"First, Tricentis could improve Tosca's Linux scripting. We can automate Linux scripting, but there are a few commands that Tosca doesn't support. DVS support and the object identification mechanism could also be better."
"Primarily I'm dealing with customers looking for a cheap solution, and they are willing to try open-source automation solutions. So from this perspective, the price of Tosca is not as competitive."
"The integration with mobile testing could be useful."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". 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 ". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio, Automation Anywhere (AA) and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and UiPath Test Suite. See our Selenium HQ 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.