We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The integration with UFT is nice."
"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
"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."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
"Good use in Agile workshops, where the person needs to conceptualize the tests before the developer provides the complete application interface."
"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."
"It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"I would rate it a 10 if it had the template functionality on the web side, had better interfaces between other applications, so that we didn't have dual data entry or have to set up our own migrations."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist."
"The QA needs improvement."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"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."
"They need to improve on the reports after the execution of automation tests, since all the current organizations are looking for detailed graphical reports."
"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 can be quite expensive."
"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."
"Tricentis Tosca currently does not support any mobile testing and can be improved."
"I would like a better user interface."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Regression Testing Tools with 96 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". 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 ". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and TFS, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.
