We performed a comparison between TFS 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 biggest value-add is the solution integrates well with most Microsoft products."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"It has great functionality: work items, backlogs, source code, build releases, and it's easy to use."
"We use TFS for forecast management."
"The most valuable features of TFS are the test plans. We can reproduce reusable test plans in test automation. We have a lot of queries and this feature is very useful."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is its compatibility with Microsoft Windows systems. We have predominantly Microsoft solutions and TFS work well."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is that it keeps the code secure while working collaboratively in a team of four or five individuals."
"The most valuable features are test case writing and bug tracking."
"I am impressed with the product's script test."
"We like the fact that it works across mobile, desktop, web, and APIs. Due to this, the solution has a broad range of applications."
"You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is the recovery and cleanup process. Suppose there is a list of test cases and one test case has failed, it should not impact the other test cases. We can reuse the same test case. We can change the configuration of parameters and then use the test cases on the same thing. So, that's a useful thing. Otherwise, we have to use the cleanup process. Another useful feature is to have our own library files. We can create our objects in the libraries and reuse them. There is no need to create duplicate data for that. They have been giving some enhancements recently which means integration is also there. They've integrated with different software like Jenkins, Bamboo. So, we can also create pipeline points. They have recently given SAP and everything, which is very useful."
"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."
"We have multiple applications, and it supports parallel execution. It has mobile automation."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."
"I only use 1% of the functionality, so I am not familiar enough to know what needs to be improved."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
"TFS's CI/CD, project pipelines, and management development could be improved."
"The dashboard needs more enhancements."
"TFS needs to be stable."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"One of the areas that could be improved is to have an effective full lifecycle management."
"The solution's server for deployment needs to be improved."
"There should be ease of data manipulation within automation test cases."
"The main area where there is room for improvement is how they do upgrades. Going through this current upgrade, we were delayed a month because we are using a third-party tool. It's called Tosca Connect by Tasktop. When this latest upgrade broke that relationship between the two, it took Tricentis a month to come back with a workable solution... Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint."
"Making it more stable would be good because we get around 90% stability."
"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."
"It can be quite expensive."
"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."
"The solution is expensive."
"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."
TFS is ranked 2nd in Test Management Tools with 93 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Regression Testing Tools with 96 reviews. TFS is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". 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 ". TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Visual Studio Test Professional and Jama Connect, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete. See our TFS 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.
