We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Tricentis Tosca OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Tricentis Tosca is the #1 ranked solution in our list of top Functional Testing Tools. It is most often compared to Micro Focus UFT One: Tricentis Tosca vs Micro Focus UFT One

What is Tricentis Tosca?

Tricentis Tosca is a continuous testing platform that uses the industry’s most innovative functional testing technologies. Unlike traditional testing technologies, which are siloed and can allow for integration risks that are likely to derail end-to-end processes, Tricentis Tosca accelerates testing across the enterprise to keep pace with Agile and DevOps and helps enterprise teams to achieve 90%+ test automation rates, thereby enabling them to deliver fast and continuous feedback.

Tosca enables your large enterprise to improve the quality of its applications by equipping you for optimizing, managing, and automating your software testing.

This model-based approach to software test automation enables your organization to achieve high automation rates while at the same time maximizing business risk coverage. Tosca covers all digital initiatives, which includes moving to the cloud, modernizing core business apps, and delivering excellent customer experience.

Tosca also provides market-leading test data provisioning, test case planning and design capabilities, service virtualization, and mobile testing. The solution is fully compatible with other testing solutions and with Application Lifecycle Management products.

Benefits of Tricentis Tosca

Tricentis Tosca optimizes and accelerates the end-to-end testing of your entire digital landscape. Its AI-powered codeless approach accelerates innovation across your enterprise by removing the bottlenecks from testing and the risks from software releases.

Tosca’s functional testing tool covers every kind of testing, including API testing, exploratory testing, mobile testing, regression testing, and system integration testing. It also supports performance testing through integration with NeoLoad.

The key benefits of Tricentis Tosca include:

Acceleration of test automation with AI-powered technology that can track controls on any technology in real time.

The shifting left of testing by automating tests based on mockups and then using those same tests as the app is developed.

Smarter testing with Vision AI that keeps up with changes in your apps, regardless of the underlying platform.

Creation of resilient, stable automation for any technology

Vision AI’s integration with Tosca’s no-code platform makes test automation easy-to-use by business analyst and subject matter experts, regardless of skill level

Reviews from Real Users

IT Central Station users note that Tricentis Tosca is easy to learn, easy to maintain, and easy to automate. One user said that “It is a good tool that enables me to re-automate my scripts and update my scripts as quickly as possible." Another wrote that “The most valuable feature is the UI… The reporting is really nice.”


Tricentis Tosca Buyer's Guide

Download the Tricentis Tosca Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2021

Tricentis Tosca Customers

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Tricentis Tosca Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Tricentis Tosca pricing:
  • "We have around 200 [concurrent] licenses and the cost around $1.4 million a year."
  • "I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it."
  • "I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive."
  • "I am satisfied with the cost."
  • "My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing."

Tricentis Tosca Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
NibsMishra
AVP, Testing Service Owner at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20Popular
Having a regression suite that we can run gives us a high level of confidence in the changes we are making

Pros and Cons

  • "The Model-Based Test Automation is the most valuable feature, where you can create reusable components. Even though we are using a scriptless automation tool, there still needs to be an understanding of how to create reusable components and how to keep refactoring and how to keep regression, the test scripts, at an okay level. We are coupling Tosca with some other risk-based testing tools, as well, but automation is primarily what we're using Tosca for, the scriptless, model-based technology which is driving automation for us."
  • "There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before or worked with a company like ours, which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless."

What is our primary use case?

It's primarily used for automation. We're a pretty complex environment. We have hundreds and hundreds, if not thousands, of applications. We have more than 200 Agile teams which are doing builds across five big locations in the US.

How has it helped my organization?

We have five large business units: financial, property and casualty, enterprise applications, marketing, and emerging business. And then we have a shared-services organization. Across this, we have more than 200 Agile teams that do build work. A lot of the time, these agile teams focus on developing and testing the work that has been handed to them. When Tosca came in, one of the things we started thinking about was how Tosca could help us facilitate some end-to-end testing.

When I say end-to-end, that doesn't mean in one particular business solution area or in one particular department, but rather, how do we go across departments? If we have to create a retirement plan, the work is not just in the retirement area. It has to flow from a lot of different applications and different business units, and that facilitates the end-to-end.

The way we are organized right now is by department. Initially, our scope was to see if we could do end-to-end, but we reduced the scope because that would have meant that many people had to be ready at the same time to consume the work. So what we said is that if we can use Tosca to do end-to-end for an application, then we can use orchestrator tools like Jenkins or Concourse to create an end-to-end flow from a business perspective. 

To give you some numbers, we will be harvesting a saving of almost $1 million, in the first area that we tried this. We had 36 manual testers and we were able to go down to 14 quality engineers, so we are seeing some savings. That was the biggest. In other areas, we are seeing savings from reducing by three or four people.

In terms of cases covered by testing automation with Tosca, it's very difficult to put a number on that. Where Tosca has really made a difference is where we had manual testing only and the percentage was zero. In the area that I just mentioned, where we went from 36 to 14 testers, they were at zero percent automation and they're already at 40 percent. The goal is to be 80 percent by mid next year.

Out of our 200 teams, we have not finished all the waves yet for Tosca. Around 50 percent of them are already using it, if not more. In January of 2018, the number of associates we had doing manual testing — I'm not even talking about contractors — was around 370. Our projection is that by the end of next year, we are hoping to go down to 230 associates. That's about a 37 percent decrease in the test-analyst workforce. Most of that is going to be enabled via automation using Tosca.

We have seen lead-time change impacts as well.

We are seeing some defect numbers dropping down and we are still operationalizing. The biggest is Speedplay, where we were doing testing manually. Now, with automation, we are able to execute some of those regression tests sooner. 

Tosca enables us to run the entire regression test suite immaterial of where changes have been made. We now have much more confidence in the areas where we've implemented it. We have a high level of confidence in the changes that we are making because we know we have a regression suite that we can run.

We have seen workflow improve. Before, we wouldn't have thought off coordinating among different applications. For example, application A does their testing and tells application B, "Here is what we need." Application B goes into their cycle and they do their work and say, "Okay, we're ready." That might have taken a day, two days, five days, or a week. Now, we have examples where we have been able to directly call the database for application B and retrieve the information. What used to take six days, we are able to do in six hours.

One more example where Tosca helped a lot recently was when there was an issue where our retirement plan holders were seeing incorrect information on their PDF statements. There were 32,000 PDF statements that needed to be validated after the fix was done and it would have taken 60,000 hours for one person. So we had a couple of our folks create scripts. It took them two days and they executed all the 32,000 PDF validations in one day. Tosca didn't only help us in terms of time, because it was more an issue of cost-avoidance, but it helped us gain the trust of business because business signed off on it. Business was the one which had said, "We need to validate each and every PDF manually," and that's where that estimate had come from.

We are seeing a lot of these success stories. We expect, once we have the full implementation done next year, that we'll see many more examples.

Overall, by next year, we will be looking at a total reduction in testing costs of about $14 million, across the span of three years. That includes both build and run. Build is very difficult for us to harvest because if we reduce the money in build — if we take away two people — the demand grows and they add two developers. But overall, from a build and run perspective, we are looking at forecast savings of $14 million. This year alone, we have proved that we have reduced the overall spend by $3.5 million.

Another big use case which where we have been helped a lot is through Tosca BI, which helps with large-volume validation from a data perspective. For a lot of our data lines, we have an automation framework, but it doesn't do as well when it comes to comparing huge volumes of data from source to target. That's a place where Tosca BI has helped us because it can do those large file and data comparisons in a very short time.

What is most valuable?

The Model-Based Test Automation is the most valuable feature, where you can create reusable components. Even though we are using a scriptless automation tool, there still needs to be an understanding of how to create reusable components and how to keep refactoring and how to keep regression, the test scripts, at an okay level. We are coupling Tosca with some other risk-based testing tools, as well, but automation is primarily what we're using Tosca for, the scriptless, model-based technology which is driving automation for us.

It has other features for requirements which we are just starting to look at. We do have another requirements tool which is enterprise-wide. Not everyone is using Tosca in our company. We still have a mix of a couple of tools. Even though Tosca has a great requirements feature, and some teams are using it, they are still expected to use our standard enterprise requirements tool. It's a choice that the users are making regarding whether they use the other features of Tosca, like requirements and risk-based testing, or not.

What needs improvement?

There have been some setbacks because of upgrades. While Tosca has been around for a while, Tricentis has catered to smaller clients and I don't think they have done such a large, at-scale transition or transformation before, or worked with a company like ours which is doing an enterprise-wide transformation. When we go to their customer advisory-board meetings, upgrades have been on the agenda an issue. They have been working a lot to make upgrades seamless.

There have been cases where we have needed customization because things haven't worked with the out-of-the-box functionality of Tosca. Customizations are VB and C# and those are not a "go-forward" for our company from a technology perspective, so we have asked Tricentis to do all the customizations for us. There have been cases where we have gone back because of the upgrades that they have done. We had to redo and re-scan things. 

Since we operate at such a large scale, we want to limit ourselves to one or two upgrades a year. That was our biggest complaint, when we went to California this year in May we told them they need to make their upgrade process more seamless. Initially, it felt like anytime we took an upgrade, we had to go back and re-scan everything. There was a combination of having to do re-scanning but also our not knowing how we should do things. In the last six months or so, we have reached a place where that has been much better. The last upgrade that we took was much more seamless than the first upgrade we took this year. They have made great strides in helping us do that.

With regression testing, the challenge we are now facing is data. That's a whole other effort that we are working on, as test data is a problem. This is especially true where a system gets data from five other areas. It is very dependent on their data. Until we are in a place where we can do end-to-end testing, or we can virtualize their data, even though we may have 100 percent automation, it does not help. We are working with Tricentis on this, and we are working at some other tools as well.

From a testing automation-perspective, we are still continuing the journey. It's going to go to 2020. We have areas that we have not touched yet. We are heading there but we are also starting to take a look at data to see how can we combine the automation that we have done with test data to have an automated CI/CD pipeline. We have gained a lot of confidence by implementing automation using Tosca. If we hit any roadblocks, it's more from a data perspective.

From where they were at when we started with Tosca in 2018, to where they are now, they have made huge changes and enhancements to their features. It's much better. And I think they have gained as much from partnering with us on this large-scale enterprise as we have.

Tricentis is pretty open to helping and working on any enhancements and patches. If you ask Tricentis, they will say qTest has all the capabilities we are looking in integration. We are going with JIRA, and we have tools like Hexawise and GitHub. One thing we would like to see is integration of Tosca with those. We know their qTest is integrated with everything, but not everybody is necessarily going to take qTest. We are looking at qTest as an option for replacing defect management, but we are not sure we will be going that route. If companies don't have qTest and only have Tosca, integration is an area where there is room for improvement in Tosca.

Finally, Tosca is on-prem right now. We have VDIs that have the Tosca agents installed. We have a very aggressive cloud roadmap as a company for moving our applications to the cloud. We are trying to work with Tricentis to help us make the move. We would love it if the Tosca agents could be installed on Docker instead of VDI. But I don't think Tricentis is ready for that yet. I don't think Tosca is actively on the cloud, so we are using the on-prem.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Tosca for a little bit more than one-and-a-half years. The last quarter of 2017 was the first time we started looking at Tosca and our actual implementation started in 2018. We are now going full-fledged with Tosca.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability has been pretty good so far. Whatever we build, we have been able to use it on a regular basis. The only challenges, as I mentioned before, were when we did the upgrades. We had to go back and re-scan. Apart from that, the stability has been pretty good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The way we are going about it, it is a scalable model. We are looking at reusability. We are trying to put some kind of governance model in place, where we will have people going back to review and analyze how things are being used. We are trying to come up with an assessment framework for Tosca. 

We have some areas that have Ruby. When we go to an area that already has something implemented in Ruby, we have an automation assessment framework from a Ruby perspective, where we ask our Ruby experts to assess their framework. If the assessment comes out that their framework is pretty solid, stable, maintainable, and they have the skillset, we leave it alone. If the assessment comes out that it is not maintainable, people are not using it, it's not providing the value, we recommend using Tosca. In the same way that we have an automation-assessment for Ruby, we are trying to work on some kind of assessment framework for Tosca. If someone has been using Tosca for two years, we want to be able to go in, assess their framework and say, "Hey, here are the things you have been doing that are great. But you don't have any modules that you're reusing. Why is that?" We are working on implementing something like that, which help us with the reusability and maintainability perspective

With every release they are adding great features. This year, we have taken two upgrades and they have added patches for some defects, like the one that caused the problem with the PDFs. We have 12 or 13 incidents that are open, which include three customization requests, that Tricentis is working on with us. But with their every release, they have added features, not just closed defects, but actually added features, which is great. The challenge is that, in a big company like ours, we cannot afford to take every feature release, every upgrade. That creates a lot of work and a lot of testing, because we need to test everything. Tricentis has been able to give us their roadmap and, at this point, we are planning to take on 13.1 which will be around January/February, 2020.

They do a lot of good releases. It's just that at our scale, the way we are operating — we have 200 licenses and I'm pretty sure we'll need more — we cannot afford to take every upgrade.

We still have other applications that we have not finished in terms of setting them up with Tosca. This is going to go through 2020. Then we will be looking at ways of having people go back to the areas where it has been implemented to see how things are going and what was not implemented. When we are deploying Tosca, we are not doing it for all applications. A particular business solution or department might have 50 applications out of which ten might be critical. We have only put Tosca in place for one or two of those, but we put the right structure in place for them to be able to extend it to the other applications. We intend to go back and see if they have been able to extend or if they need help in increasing the automation presence. We do expect to see an increase in automation usage and coverage, moving forward.

How are customer service and technical support?

We had someone from Tricentis here until September or mid-October. He was not a very technical resource, but he was our go-to person who would reach out. We also have a customer-facing rep, so I usually text him if I have any issues. We have biweekly calls with tech support. 

The challenge we have seen, at times, is that when an incident is opened or when a ticket is opened, it is treated as normal, just like anything else. But there are times where they are very high-priority for us and that's where escalations come into play. It's frustrating when different people are looking at an incident at different times. We have raised some of these concerns.

A recent example is that we needed a customization for a big area. It's a big data space and we have been waiting on this customization for a couple of weeks. We recently escalated and they said, "Hey, they will start development in mid-December or late December." We said, "That's absolutely not going to work out for us." I texted my contact and he immediately texted back saying, "I have raised it to the highest level. This person is on vacation, we'll reach out to you next week."

So they provide pretty good response. Our customer rep is pretty good at escalating. 

The tech support is good, they are reaching out to us. We get it, that they're all busy, but we keep pressing that if they want to work with a company like ours, which is doing a large, at-scale, enterprise-wide transformation, if they cannot meet us where we need them to or if they cannot meet our SLA, it's not going to work out. 

Sometimes, it's one person at Tricentis who is working on something for us. If that person is on vacation, we are stuck. We have said, "Hey, only one person?" but again, they are also growing. We are most probably one of their biggest enterprise-wide transformations. They have clients with tons of licenses, but they are all department-level automation transformations. This is their first enterprise-wide where we are doing it across the company. We have buy-in from the highest level, our CIO. 

Tricentis has done a good job of keeping stride with us. Is there a place for improvement? Absolutely. They need to change their operating model to be able to cater to large-scale enterprises if that's the direction they want to go in. It was very evident in the beginning that they're not used to working with a big company. They have come a long way and we have been pretty vocal about it too.

But they have been pretty good at it. We do face our challenges and we do have to do escalations and so forth for some of these areas, because our business units and our partners don't understand delays. They will say "Okay, if Tosca is not able to help us, we are going somewhere else." Tricentis understands that and they give us high priority. This is an issue that will be there for any company, any tool, irrespective. I don't think this is something unique to Tricentis. We have tech debt on our side and sometimes we ask them to work around our tech debt, which is not what they would expect.

Overall, the tech support is pretty good. We have a way of reaching out to their management, a direct email address that takes it to the highest level of escalation. We have a good working relationship and we are not unhappy. We are pretty satisfied. Some frustration will always be there, but they have been able to work around things pretty well for us and they turn around things pretty well.

Tricentis is still growing and they are understanding what it means to work with a large, at-scale company. We do escalations every week to their upper management. But from a tool perspective, it's doing great. It's working out really well for us in terms of automation. They are at a better place when it comes to being able to release in a way that is not causing people to go back. In a company like ours, if people have to put in a lot of effort for upgrades, or if they have to go back and re-scan and re-work a lot, they will just move away to other tools. That's something we have made very clear to Tricentis. We have said, "If you don't give us what we want and if you're not able to meet us where we are, and at the speed at which we want, it will not take long for us to move away." So far, they have been great at meeting us where we are, or escalating and getting the right people to do what we want done.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In terms of model-based, scriptless automation, Tosca is the first of its kind in our organization. We have been using Ruby Cucumber and Selenium, but they are all solutions where development and coding skills are needed. This is our first model/scriptless tool.

We have an automation solution which was primarily Ruby Cucumber, but Ruby requires development skills. We had not been able to penetrate it into all the places we wanted it to be used. We have a lot of legacy and mainframe applications and there was a lot of downward testing still going on. On the digital applications and the go-forward applications, we have a good footprint from a Ruby perspective and test automation. But in all these legacy applications and some of the older technology applications, we had manual testing going on.

We had a big goal as a company. We had done some benchmarking studies and what came out from them was that we are pretty good from a quality perspective when compared to our peers, but we are very expensive. So we were charged with a couple of things: to bring down the expense and increase speed, while maintaining the quality if not improving the quality. That's what led us on the path to Tricentis Tosca.

When using Ruby, there are more hands-on coding development skills. Tosca is something that needs a technical mindset or aptitude, but even our manual testers were able to make the shift from manual testing to automation using Tosca. That was a big driver: How do we move from manual testing to more automation and how do we not impact the big workforce that we had in manual testing? We did not want to have to let go of all manual testers, and we didn't have enough skills from a Ruby perspective. With this effort, we have been successfully able to convert around 80 percent of our manual testers to automators, using Tosca.

There are areas in our company which have Ruby, some of the digital areas, where it works. So we are letting those areas stay with Ruby.

How was the initial setup?

When we did the initial setup — and this is a lesson we learned as a company — it was not directly with Tricentis. We worked with one of our global service providers, Accenture. They are the ones who proposed some of these tools to us and they are the ones who helped with the initial setup. They were here with us for 2018. In 2019, we took it on from them, and then Tricentis came onboard and we started having a direct relationship with Tricentis.

Looking back, I think it would have been much better if we had had a direct relationship with Tricentis from the get-go. There were some things that were done where Tricentis came in and said, "Hey, this is how you should have done this." That was a lesson learned for us as a company where, going forward, even if we have global service providers, we will hopefully have direct contact with the vendor as well. That's something we didn't do.

We did take a complex area with COBOL and all that, so we needed customizations, but we did it through a GSP and it was okay. It went pretty well. I wouldn't say the setup was very complex since Accenture did the heavy handholding, so it was easy for us. Had we done it, it would have been a different story, but Accenture paved the way for us.

For the initial setup, we had five or six folks from our side. Accenture's team was offshore but there were three or four of their team here. It was a pretty complex application. There were ten to 12 people who worked on it to get it going. Once the initial baseline was set, we had people automating it, working with business, coming up with the list of features, prioritizing the features, and then coming up with a roadmap. 

When we go into these waves, it's a nine-month plan. The first week is diagnostic where we consider which applications we even want to attempt to start automating. Then we do a two-week design period where we consider which flows we want to automate. What are the critical flows or critical business functionalities within the application, with the most manual testing or the most frequent testing, that we want to automate? We identify five workflows, usually critical and high-priority, that we will try to automate using Tosca. Then we have a one-month "test-and-learn" where two or three people from our side partner with the department testers, and they automate things during that a month. Once that's done, we provide a recommendation saying, "Hey, we did it. Tosca seems to be the better option. Here are the benefits you will get." There is then an operationalized phase of usually six, and up to nine, months after that. At the end of those six to nine months, we should be able to go from 36 people down to 20.

We come out with a big plan that we present to the department. They all agree. We talk about what skillsets are needed going forward. How many will be flexible staff, how many will be contractors, how many will be associates? We replicate that plan every time we go to a business. That is a plan that Accenture helped us put together and it has been very successful. That's something which Tricentis is trying give over as an example to some of their bigger clients because it's been a pretty successful implementation so far. It is a reusable, repeatable process that we have come up with. Every group knows what to expect out of it.

The learning curve for Tosca is not steep compared to some technical products. It has been pretty okay, as long as the people have the mindset. So when we hire quality engineers, we don't ask them questions about Tosca. We ask them questions about their mindset to see if they have an automation-first mindset. What we are seeing from a skillset perspective is that 80 percent of the manual testing quality engineers are able to make a shift but at a lower level.

For entry-level or mid-level people, it's very easy to make the shift. At a higher level, we do expect our quality engineers to have some technical aptitude, like SQL programming skills. in addition to Tosca, we are also using Tosca BI, which needs SQL skills. So we do need some technical skills, but we are seeing much better success in transforming our manual testing population to using Tosca and Tosca BI than we have seen with any other development or programming language. So the learning curve is pretty good. It's easy and not too steep.

We have been doing the implementation in a wave approach. We didn't go with a big-bang saying, "Okay, we want to implement Tosca everywhere," because that would not work. Instead, we did an enterprise-wide transformation. We looked at testing spend for each department and started with the ones that had the highest testing spend. We put together a two-and-half-year to three-year roadmap saying, "Here is how we are going to hit applications, the big applications." We have 40 major application suites, each of which can be a combination of applications.

We defined roles, because each application suite needs an application suite quality engineer who is going to be accountable. We had a whole process that we worked through. It was not just a tool transformation but a transformation in terms of people and technology. Technology came at the end. It was more transforming peoples' mindsets and making sure they understood what we were trying to do. We wanted them to understand the intent because with Tosca, it's very easy to fall into the same trap as with anything else. If there are practices where people have wrong naming conventions or don't understand the value of versioning that Tosca provides, there is a need to create best practices. Tricentis has been pretty good at teaming up with us to share their best practices and working with us to come up with best practices that work for our company.

What was our ROI?

For ROI, when we originally planned, we had thought it would be somewhere around $13 to $20 million. Right now, we're looking at $14 million over the three-year period.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We have a three-year license. The one thing I'll say is that it is very expensive. That's the reason we are not giving access to Tosca to everyone in the company, because it's licensed-based. The licenses are concurrent, but still, only our quality engineer workforce gets access to Tosca. Developers don't get access. Test automation developers don't get access. Others don't get access either. We have around 200 licenses and the cost around $1.4 million a year.

We have found benefits with Tosca. That's the reason we went with it. Ruby and other open-source solutions are free, but we were not able to get the skillsets we needed for them and maintenance was an issue. With Tosca, we see benefits from that perspective. We don't have to lose our workforce. We can harvest the subject-matter expertise that people already have and use them for this. We did see a lot of benefit in moving to Tosca. That's why we were ready to take on a licensed tool, in comparison to an open-source tool.

For Tosca, there are no other costs. 

Tosca BI is twice the cost of Tosca so we have limited Tosca BI licenses as well. There are things that come along with Tosca from Tricentis and we're looking at some of those tools.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We work with Accenture, Cognizant and Tara. They are our global service providers. We did an RFP, but Accenture only put Tosca on the table. They didn't give us any other options for scriptless.

We went online, went to some conferences, and talked to people who are using Tosca. We did industry-review research and the like that. But in the end, we were able to prove out Tosca and that's the reason we went with it.

What other advice do I have?

Before looking at a tool, it's not just about implementing the tool. It's about having the right mindset to be able to implement a tool. With Tosca, we didn't go and say, "We want to use Tosca. Go." We have a whole training where we talk about what needs to shift, how you need to shift, why we are doing it, and making people understand the intent behind using some of these tools. Otherwise it does not work. We have seen enough failures with other implementations to know that if we don't have the right mindset, these things don't work.

Also, having the right partnership and setting expectations with the vendor is very important. If they have good best-practices and if they know what they're doing, that will help. Having a long-term vision is very important, instead of just saying, "Okay, I'm going to implement Tosca. Go," and not knowing where you want to go or what you want the future to look like. Those are things that helped us a lot in our implementations of Tosca.

One lesson, as I said, is that working with the tool vendor helps. Not that Accenture didn't do a great job. They did. They helped us a lot, especially from a process and best-practices perspective. But having Tricentis in there would have been good.

Tosca was relatively new in the US when we started using it. The roadmap was not fully baked. I would love to work with them on their cloud roadmap. I still don't have a great answer when it comes to cloud roadmap for Tosca, from Tricentis. That's something we're still pushing them on.

Tricentis also has a great relationship with Salesforce and that has helped us a lot. We're trying to push them to have a similar kind of relationship with Guidewire, with Guidewire 10 coming and the cloud option. That's another thing which we will be using Tosca for. We have been asking Tricentis to have some kind of partnership with Guidewire, and they have been asking us if we can introduce them. We're working through that. We have a user group for that with other Tosca users that are in Guidewire and who are moving to Guidewire 10.

It would be great if Tricentis could take a look ahead at some of these big vendors, packaged applications, and form some relationships with them. That would help companies like us who are heavy users of these packaged applications. We would like to see something similar to what they have done with SAP and with Salesforce. Guidewire is big right now. That's an area they have not done anything in yet.

We were an IBM shop. We used to use Rational Team Concert and Rational Requirements Composer. We're shifting to JIRA for requirements. We're still looking at what we will use for persistent requirements, but right now it's JIRA. Even if users want to use Tosca for requirements, and there are teams who are doing it because it helps us get good coverage, we still use JIRA and then we try to integrate from JIRA to Tosca, but we have not done that yet.

Tosca has a risk-based functionality, which we are not using, which they added after we started with Tosca. It can take a look at the data and say, "Hey, you have 200 test cases and you are getting 50 percent coverage based on the requirements that you have in Tosca. You can get the same coverage using 100 test cases." The reason we didn't use the Tosca's risk-based testing is that risk-based testing is applicable irrespective of the tool. Since Tosca is not something that is the only standard at our company — we have multiple tools — we had to choose a tool that we could use across the enterprise and not be dependent on the Tosca licenses. So we use another tool for risk-based testing.

When you talk about redundancy, there are two aspects. One is: We have been using Tosca for three years; we have 2,000 scripts. Even though Tosca has all the functionality by being model-based with reusability, not everyone understands that. In these past three years, new people might have come in and added test scripts and test cases without knowing that something already existed. They may have created duplication and redundancy. Can Tosca go and help us with that? I don't think so. We are actually looking for a tool that can help us do that. We were looking at Saffron AI Suite, which is an Intel product, but Intel decided not to support it. We're still looking for a tool that can help us with duplication. 

But what we are doing is from a data perspective is the following: If I say, "Hey, here is my data, here is my test case, here are the data elements that are needed. Tell me what is the minimum number of scripts I need to get maximum coverage?" Tosca can do that. But as I said, we didn't want to depend on Tosca because we're not using Tosca across the enterprise. We're using another tool called Hexawise to help us do that and it's something that we're implementing across the company. It is much more cost-effective for us than having Tosca licenses for everyone. Tosca is expensive. We're trying to use the output from Hexawise to create test cases in Tosca to help us get that minimum number of test cases we need to get the maximum coverage. That coupling has been working well for us.

Maintenance is better with Tosca. The way Tosca is structured, it tells you where your tests are failing and the like. If I have nine quality engineers for an application and they are spread across three build teams, if they have the continuous integration implemented, whatever issues or errors come up, we expect them to keep maintaining things on a go-forward basis. Maintenance is absolutely easier with Tosca, provided it has been implemented the right way. We're not differentiating between people who are doing build work versus people who are doing maintenance. It's the same people. We expect them to build the test cases and maintain them as well.

I would rate Tosca at about eight out of ten. We're pretty happy with the results we've seen with Tosca.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
reviewer1215411
Global QA Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Provides us with a central repository for manual and automated test cases, which allows us to share and reuse test cases globally.

Pros and Cons

  • "Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for test automation and manual tests, and we use it as our central repository for all test cases.  Our test cases focus on front end testing and back-end testing.  Tosca BI is what we use for back-end testing.  

We also have built out RPA processes that run in Tosca in conjunction with DEX.

How has it helped my organization?

We're currently going through an upgrade of a system here, in-house, and Tosca has allowed us to do more testing compared to what we were previously able to do. In the past, it would just take too much time for humans to do. This additional testing that we're doing, which provides additional test coverage for the upgrade, would take a couple of individuals three weeks to do, and we're able to do it within 24 hours with Tosca.

Also, the solution enables us to run the entire regression test suite, immaterial of where a change has been made. We're able to run all our regression tests at one time. We do not have CI/CD set up yet, so it still has to be manually kicked off. For example, for the in-house upgrade I mentioned, most of what they're building is regression test cases because we want to make our upgrades faster and we want to do them more frequently. So as the users are building out the test cases, they're also creating the regression execution list. They can build upon that and then run that when they need to. And then all they do is do the analysis of the execution.

Tosca is also slowly starting to remove redundant test cases. We're working with the users to build better test cases and remove those redundancies as well. This really helps because we have the central repository which allows us to share everybody's test cases and to reuse the test cases globally. We have delivery teams in Edinburgh and in the Netherlands as well as here in the US. It really allows for that single collaboration and for reduction and reuse of test cases. We're still analyzing how this has affected our testing efficiency. That's one of the reasons we're upgrading to 12.3. We want the Tricentis Analytics to help paint that picture a little bit better for us.

We are starting to see the test speed increase a little bit. Looking, again, at that in-house upgrade's tests, if we had manual testers doing it, it would take a couple of weeks, and now we can execute test cases in 24 hours. Another team just completed some test automation test cases that take two minutes to run. When they first ran them they ran into errors and issues which were legitimate issues. The developers fixed them and they ran the tests again and found some more errors. They went back to developers. The whole time it took to resolve things was about 20 minutes. That is a huge improvement over how things worked before. It would have taken hours if it was manually tested, verified, etc.

Finally, we have BAs who have been trained on Tosca, people who have picked it up fairly quickly with little background in development or coding, and they've been able to get up and running on it fairly quickly. We would like to get to the business to be able to help control testing as well, but we're not there yet. We are using exploratory testing, but we're not 100 percent using that quite yet.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are 

  • Tosca BI 
  • Tosca Commander.

Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems. 

Tosca Commander lets any test cases that are UI driven validate, and tests the UI and expected results.

Also, the nice thing about the model's solution is that we're able to build out the modules within Tosca, to facilitate ease of maintaining the test cases. It allows one spot to do an update and that flows through all the test cases that need to be updated.

What needs improvement?

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. To me, that resulted in critical customer impact and it took way too long for them to resolve. Their whole upgrade process needs to be better and cleaner, from an end-user standpoint.

For how long have I used the solution?

4 years

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability seems pretty robust. We've come across some minor issues, but I think you'll have that with any kind of thing with any software. Those issues were the result of a combination of the environment and not having the knowledge of other things that would help resolve them.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, one of the things I do is challenge people to prove that it doesn't work. It has yet to be proven to me that it doesn't work with something. We've always found a way to be able to do test automation with it.

We have developers and BAs using the tool. We have 16 delivery teams and there are an average of seven people on each team. We require two people for maintenance of the solution. They are test automation engineers. If you're talking about maintaining test cases, everybody on the delivery team is involved. It's in their goals to maintain their test cases for what they deliver, and that includes developers and BAs.

Every day, Tosca is being used more and more. Part of our digital transformation is that we keep growing the tool base and what the test cases are.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tosca's technical support is mediocre. I've worked with better support. The reason I say that is because, here in the US, if we put in a support ticket, that ticket usually goes to the European support and there's that time lag. Something that could be responded to within an hour or two can have a 24-hour gap until we get any response.

Also, sometimes we run into some who are technical and then we run into support members who aren't very technical, and who just give a canned answer. That's not very helpful. There's definitely room for improvement in terms of their support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used Selenium before Tosca. One of the reasons we decided to look at other tools was that, with Selenium, the maintenance of the scripts started becoming higher. The more and more that test cases were built, the higher the maintenance cost was and we started seeing a diminishing return as a result. 

Also, you really can't do database testing, for the most part. There are ways around that limitation, but it just doesn't work very well with Selenium. 

From a reporting standpoint, you really can't produce robust reports like you can within Tosca. 

Finally, the infrastructure with Selenium is a little bit more challenging and there's really no built-in test management with Selenium as well.

How was the initial setup?

On a scale of one to ten, with one being straightforward and ten being complex, the setup was around six or seven. It wasn't completely straightforward but it wasn't totally complex either. It just needed some insight from Tricentis to make sure things were being done correctly.

The first deployment took about a week. We then went through an upgrade where we used their consulting service as well, because that was when they changed how the licensing was done and the license server. That took about two weeks to do. With this latest upgrade, we're going on our fifth week now. It's taken us a little longer because of that issue that we uncovered.

Our implementation strategy was a global implementation, where we empowered all delivery teams to be able to use Tosca. We set up the application servers and the repository in a global data center and then we pushed out Tosca Commander to all the delivery teams so they could do test automation and manual testing as well.

What about the implementation team?

We used a Tricentis consultant for the first setup and deployment. They were fantastic. They're very knowledgeable, they're great at what they do, they know the product inside and out, and it really helped speed things up. 

What was our ROI?

ROI is one of the reasons we're trying to get Tricentis Analytics set up, so we can provide factual data on the test cases and the return. We have KPIs set up to help us with that.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We paid upfront for the licenses and maintenance and we pay the maintenance fees as we move forward, yearly. There are no additional costs that I am aware of.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated SmartBear, HPE QTP (now UFT), QuerySurge, and Alteryx.

It was very apparent that Tosca was an all-in-one solution. We could do database testing, UI, and API testing. The others focus on one area. HPE and SmartBear focus on things such as UI/UX interface-type testing, while Alteryx and QuerySurge focus on backend database testing. Tricentis encompasses all that and that's why we selected them.

What other advice do I have?

If you're going to have somebody come in and help set up, don't go with a third-party vendor, but have Tricentis consultants come in, do training, and help set up. It's worth the extra money to have them come in and do right, versus a third-party that might not know everything. That was our experience. We tried the third-party route to help us, and we immediately saw that it was not the right way to go. That's when we went to Tricentis themselves to come in and help us.

The biggest lesson I've learned is more connected to the tool's adoption. If people have been doing the same thing for over ten years, it tends to be a little bit hard for them to switch over because they want to do things the way they've always been doing them. But the tool itself is fairly simple. It's a pretty solid tool.

There are a few ways to overcome the resistance to new technology. But it's really about creating urgency around why the tool is important to the company and why people need to adopt it. We've done lunch-and-learns to help people understand it. We also champion any success stories with the tool, through newsletters that go out. Sometimes, it's just about bringing in new people with the right mindset.

We've slowly been increasing our rate of testing automation using Tosca. We did a digital transformation with SAFe Agile, and then with adopting test automation. So the tool-adoption piece has taken a little bit longer. We're not quite where we want to be yet. We're still building on it. Tosca covers about 50 percent of our test cases at this point. The solution hasn't reduced our cost of testing yet. We're still a little immature in this process.

In terms of delivering more features for release, we are watching features but we're not there yet. We're just not mature enough to have those hard facts to help us state that this is helping complete more features. From a defects standpoint, we're trying to get a better handle on how defects are captured here, because before there wasn't a concise, approved process on defects. Everybody did their own thing and I'm pretty sure things fell through the cracks. People weren't identifying defects as defects. That's another one of the things we're trying to get better at.

Tricentis keeps building on BI and Tosca itself, and they're just getting better and better every time. A lot of the things they're focusing on are the right things.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Learn what your peers think about Tricentis Tosca. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2021.
540,694 professionals have used our research since 2012.
MarkusBonner
Release Test Manager at a tech company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
They're always refining the test methodology

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use Tosca to automate progressive and regressive tests. About 60 people in my company are currently using it.

What is most valuable?

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. So whenever there is some new need for a testing capability, I can be sure that Tricentis will implement it into the Tosca Test Suite quickly, and we can use it.

What needs improvement?

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. So they don't have a good reporting solution currently, and I hope they add one soon. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for around 16 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Tosca's stability is good. However, when we upgrade, sometimes we find some defects or problems. These are usually fixed within days or two weeks if there are bigger issues. And this is once per year, usually without any bigger issues. The only other thing that sometimes causes problems is when the time path and some repositories are not on hand. Also, if the infrastructure or the network is not stable, you can have problems with the application. But, of course, that's not something the application can really prevent, like if the internet connection breaks or something like that. Especially now that almost all of us are working remotely. So you can have some defects on the network that causes some problems in the application as well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Before, we also used Tosca for manual testing. We had, I think, 400 to 800 main users — not at the same time — but we had a lot of users then. If you know the size of your repository, then it's easy to size the server accordingly. Also, when you know your requirements, you should make sure that the infrastructure meets the requirements, then it's easier. 

How are customer service and support?

The quality of Tricentis support really depends on the type of issue. When it's important, I go through the surveys, account manager quizzes, and so on. Tricentis handles the important issues quickly. And if we have smaller problems, it's usually routed to India, so we get a lot of basic questions back, and I don't like that process much. But, when it's important, we're immediately connected to the right people and get quick solutions.

How was the initial setup?

Setting up Tosca is quite straightforward. The main issue is setting up your infrastructure, the network port, and all those things upfront. But when this is fine, then the installation is uncomplicated. Then, we update once a year, and it takes a few hours.

What about the implementation team?

We have some integrators and consultants working for us, and we always have on-demand vendor support if something is not working. They resolve issues quickly. The vendor handles software maintenance. Our installation and maintenance can be partially done by a Tricentis consultant who works for our team. But before, it was an in-house guy. That guy left, so we hired an external consultant to do the same functions as the in-house staffer. So we have someone in the organization who is doing that. Before, it was internal and not external, but he is working basically like an internal for us.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it. You can then make a business case and see how the licensing fits best since they have different licensing models. You have to find the right model of licensing for you and then negotiate a reasonable price. So we always make a business case, and if the business case is okay, the licensing price is also okay. It provides value for the money. It's a stable product with a lot of functionality. And as I said before, it keeps pace with all the new trends that the analysts suggest, so it's worth the money

What other advice do I have?

I rate Tosca nine out of 10. So if you are considering this solution, I recommend that you make sure your team is good and stable in test definition. Also, you should build up your organization's competence in test automation. That way, you can get the most out of the tool and utilize its capabilities to benefit your organization. But there are challenges with a large organization internally. For example, we first had a central team for test automation. Then we moved to HL and de-centralized our test automation team. Unfortunately, that didn't work so well since it requires some specialized knowledge that you need to learn and to practice. So now we are trying to move again to centralized test automation and get more value for the business.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
gagneet
Continuous Delivery Lead at SAI Global
Consultant
Top 5Leaderboard
TOSCA Testsuite Review

What is our primary use case?

Mixed environment having web and desktop applications, integrating with each other and over an API Gateway. API based and Financial Services portal testing created using modern technology using C# and ReactJS.

How has it helped my organization?

- Brought a good environment of test automation

- Allowed a significant increase in Continuous Integration

What is most valuable?

- Great User Interface and ease of checking all your artifacts of Testing.

- Makes optimal use of Model-based Test practice in getting Object-references from the application.

- Script-less, so less maintenance headache for non-technical users also.

- Drag and drop functionality to create and re-use your Test Cases

- Excellent re-use of Excel functionality for formulas and functions.

- Conditions which let the test case branch off from the Template. Helps work out different scenarios for data.

- Has been tried out on SAP, Oracle Apps, and IBM COGNOS BI applications. With a few tweaks works well with these applications.

- IF and LOOP statements introduced with the latest version.

- Improved performance of Web-Based Tests. WHILE LOOP and IF made better and more responsive with added error recovery options.

- Intuitive based options available, along with a rudimentary record and play functionality.

- Next version will even have the visualization tools required to see the interconnections between the TCD and the Test Cases, along with the workflow in the TCD and Tests.

- New and improved visualization for multiple browsers and a totally new Wizard with TBox out of Box support has been added to the (v9.2) of TOSCA Commander.

- Access to Business Intelligence (BI) features of comparing a DB to another one, also have been added as plugins.

- Access to an Analytical Engine to view and get reports from the Test Runs.

- Version 13 has also brought in BI testing and improvements on SAP Test scenarios

What needs improvement?

- Upgrades to the newer version if extra Add-ins are installed sometimes causes weird issues.

- Needs a UI to be open and present when running the tests. Cannot visit the DOM like in Selenium.

- Needs a UI to visualize the test case development.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used it for the past 9 years

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

None seen as such, except it has a reliance on the Network for Licenses. If the network is lost, then the license will expire and crash/close the application.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Depends on the Licensing model you take up.

How are customer service and technical support?

Customer Service:

Excellent almost 16x5 service with issue resolution within a given 24-hour time frame.

Technical Support:

- Great Customer Support, technical from the first step.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Yes, have been using HP QTP and Selenium for Test Automation. Switch was mainly due to Team constraints and management wanting to try a new tool which is easier for the Business Analysts also to collaborate with.

How was the initial setup?

Setup is simple but requires learning of the tool and how it does things before you can optimally use it.

What about the implementation team?

In-house implementation.

What was our ROI?

An exceptionally good ROI, as we reduced the number of Tests from 4000 to around 89 scenario's which can be run in an automated manner with additional data (so in actuality we have around 1.4M tests, which can theoretically be run without human intervention). We have a full-stack CI pipeline for running these along with JIRA (requirement gathering and test results per Story), to the final TeamCity run for each check-in to the Dev branch.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is steep if you go for the premium model. Advice would be to buy a mix of licenses, depending on the need. The Tricentis Sales are rather good at helping you with this, once you give the intent to buy. They are not just shoving you the highest premium toy/license.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Yes, evaluated TestComplete, HP UFT ALM, Selenium / SpecFlow / Cucumber.

What other advice do I have?

Take the online training on Udemy before you confirm the intent to buy it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Shweta Mukkawar
Technical Lead at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Good reporting, easy-to-use interface, and the APIs are useful

Pros and Cons

  • "The reporting is really nice."
  • "The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars."

What is our primary use case?

We have been using this solution in my organization. There are several clients who have come back to us asking for different automation tools and our views on which automation tools can be used in their respective projects.

We have been evaluating for these clients. The evaluations we were doing, was for our client but done within the organization only.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the UI.

We work primarily on evaluating the UI. We evaluated Tosca BI and a bit for Tosca APIs and think they are very useful.

The reporting is really nice. There are many clients who ask for a feature with any automation tool that can generate good reports for them. There is only one such tool that facilitates that option, which is Tosca.

What needs improvement?

The volume for the BI testing is limited. If they could provide a few options to use it, using Tosca only, that could be a great thing because there are a lot of clients who do not actually want to go for the BI, but then they do have the database testing.

I know that Tosca provides the feature but it's very minuscule.

The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars. There are workarounds for that but for example, if I open two tabs that have the same page then it will give me another difficulty in scanning those options. 

In the next release, including this in Tricentis would be great.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been acquainted with this solution for approximately eight months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

So far, what we have used has been stable.

I have read some reviews where they have expressed that they are not happy with the stability, but so far, I have not faced any such issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is good. If I had to rate it out of five, I would say that it would be a three-point five to four.

We have anywhere from 500 to 750 people who are using this solution in our organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good. Their turnaround time is usually within 24 to 48 hours, but normally we have a response within 24 hours.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we did not work with any other solution.

How was the initial setup?

We have always worked with the demo licenses, which included support from the Tricentis teams. They have always been able to set up the licensing.

I would say that it is not that straightforward.

On average, it did not take more than two to three hours if you know the process properly. To get it started, it will require at least six hours.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The disadvantage is that it is very expensive.

I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive. If it had more interaction and if the license cost was a little less it would be better and rate higher.

What other advice do I have?

The recommendation of this solution depends from client to client and what their requirements would be, the parameters, and what is important to them. 

If the client wants good support and at the same time they want to have a good database included with the Automation Testing Suite, and is ready to spend the money, then we would definitely suggest Tricenta Tosca as a good option.

Again, it is dependant on the client's requirements and what they would want in an automation tool.

If you have Linux or Mac machines, then it gets very difficult to implement Tosca. I would suggest using it. 

For testing, they would want to migrate miscellaneous scripts and use Tosca for those migrations. But, it's very difficult. 

My suggestion would be to go with the Tricentis Suites and the Selenium Automation Suites.

From a positive perspective, I would want people to use the reporting from Tosca. They have very good reporting. The reporting feature is very user-friendly and very easy to use.

I would rate Tricenta Tosca an eight out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Flag as inappropriate
Mangesh pangrekar
Technical Analyst at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Reseller
Top 10
Good performance, easy to understand with recovery, data reuse, and integration features

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We are using it for user names and login passwords. We are using model-based techniques where they have already entered IDs. Based on the ID, we can create the object, test case, test folder, and test types.

If I want to create a registration for five countries, I will create complete test cases and use the same data. There is no need to create different data or test cases for that. I can use the same data for different countries by using or passing the object from my object type.

In my previous company, I worked on two different projects. One was for the banking domain, and the other one was for the telecom domain. In both projects, I worked with web-based applications plus Windows-based applications by using Tricentis Tosca. I designed around 55 to 60 case designs in one project. I also worked on the test case design, maintenance, execution, delivery, and reporting. I wrote user stories and created some examples for test case stories.

What is most valuable?

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 needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for around six years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is much better. Last time, it was 10 points, and now I feel it is 12 points. 

How was the initial setup?

Tricentis Tosca is actually around 1.2 GB. It takes around 20 to 25 minutes for installation. 

We have different setup files, and we use Java for that. We use jar files for Java, and then we need to set the location and Tricentis Tosca home directory, for which we can set the variable path from environment variables.

What about the implementation team?

I deployed it by myself. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I am satisfied with the cost. 

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this product to my colleagues or my friends because it is very useful if they are using the Tosca Query Language (TQL). We can find exact data from any project, which is one of the best benefits. It is a very easy, convenient product for everyone.

Tricentis Tosca is very easy to understand. We can reuse data, and no redundant data is required. I like this tool. I am also interested in self-learning this tool and its features. 

I would rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten. It's very good performance-wise.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
ITCS user
Test Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Easy to learn, has good test templates, and it supports distributed execution with RDP

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."

What is our primary use case?

We are using this product for web UI testing, SAP, and API testing.

How has it helped my organization?

We are using a multi-user environment and the central repository gives everyone very easy access, which lets them re-use the models or whatever artifacts they need from other teams.

Apart from that, with the distributed execution, we are able to execute thousands of test cases in a very small amount of time.

These two things, I feel have been very helpful in my project.

What is most valuable?

I have found the test templates to be very useful.

Distributed execution with RDP is highly useful.

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. 

It has a built-in repository to store all of the artifacts in the same place.

What needs improvement?

The inbuilt test datasheet that it has can be simplified and improved.

There are some performance challenges, specifically when we are not using it on a virtual machine, but when we are using it on a local machine.

In order to integrate test management tools, we have to buy another product call Tosca Connect. It would be better if this were included so that integration with tools like Jira or Azure DevOps was included out of the box.

One of the issues that we are facing is that the size of the repository continues increasing. They should provide tools to minimize or at least reduce the repository size.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been dealing with Tricentis Tosca for between two, and two and a half years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Tricentis Tosca is very stable and we are using it extensively. We have people working in India, as well as in the US and Europe, so we use concurrent licensing. Most of the time, everything is being utilized.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is pretty scalable because of the templates. We can have a single template expand into hundreds of test cases, so it is scalable. In my project, we have between 50 and 60 people how are using it.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is an area where Tricentis can improve. Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response. There is a time lag between the process of raising the ticket and getting a final resolution. There is some resolution in the interim, but to receive a final resolution will usually take between two and three weeks.

I had to call technical support for one of the issues regarding a test data survey. We didn't have Microsoft Excel on our workstations so there was a question of how to upload the data. The final resolution for that issue took two to three weeks, or even longer.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the initial deployment, although I feel that the installation of it is simple. I am just not aware of how to configure the repository.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I was not involved in the decision-making process.

What other advice do I have?

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using Tricentis Tosca is that for test automation, you are not required to be a programmer or very technical.

Overall, this is a good product and I definitely recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
MohamedSoliman
Software QA Automation Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Top 10
Powerful automation testing capabilities with an easy to use and well organized interface

Pros and Cons

  • "This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it."
  • "I would like to see better integration with other testing tools."

What is our primary use case?

We are primarily using this product as an automation tool, for regression, and as a revision tool. 

How has it helped my organization?

Using the automation tool, I can transfer test cases that are being done manually to ones that are automated. After about 30 such instances, I use the regression system from the suite to create all possible combinations of test cases to try with the new version. This gives us an overview of how the software is performing. Also, when major updates take place, we re-run all of the regression tests to make sure that it still conforms to the requirements.

What is most valuable?

The automation testing functionality is very powerful.

This tool is very easy to use and I think that anyone can come in, having no experience with it, and within four to six months be comfortable with it.

The graphical interface means that you don't have to write any code.

The interface is very organized. You can find folders and settings for everything that you need, and you can easily connect things together.  

What needs improvement?

I would like to see better integration with other testing tools. There is full integration with Selenium and having this with other tools would be good.

Integration with other programming languages would also be helpful.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Tricentis Tosca for the past three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I have not really found many problems or bugs when using this product, so stability has not been an issue.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Tricentis Tosca is very scalable. You can easily move from a small test suite to a larger test suit, which I think is pretty good. We about 100 users in the organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not been in touch with technical support from the vendor.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I also have experience with Selenium HQ, Katalon Studio, and Ranorex.

How was the initial setup?

Our organization is broken into separate sections and there is a team for installation and configuration that handled the deployment. As I am not part of that team, I am unable to judge the complexity of the setup.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to make use of the extensive library that they have. It is a good collection of training videos and documentation, and I would advise everybody to go through these materials. They are really helpful and it will allow them to learn much faster, bringing them to the point where they can use it to its full potential.

In summary, I am really comfortable with this tool, I haven't had many problems, and it's sufficient for our work. In the three years that I have been working with it, whenever I've needed something, I've been able to find it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Tricentis Tosca Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.