BrowserStack vs. Tricentis Tosca

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Overview
Product	Rating	Most Used By	Product Summary	Starting Price
BrowserStack	Score 8.4 out of 10	N/A	BrowserStack is a test platform built for developers and QAs to expand test coverage, scale and optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability. BrowserStack states it currently powers over a billion tests a year for customers who include Amazon, Paypal, Well Fargo Bank, Nvidia, MongoDB, Pfizer, GE, Discovery, React JS, Apache, JQuery and several others rely on BrowserStack to test their web and mobile apps.	$0 per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
Tricentis Tosca	Score 8.8 out of 10	N/A	Tricentis Tosca provides an approach to test automation that is AI-powered, codeless, and end-to-end so it can test everything in a complex IT landscape, to ensure business processes work flawlessly no matter where changes occurs. Its 160+ technology support helps users test everything at the UI, API and data layer, including virtually any enterprise, custom, homegrown and mobile application. With its model-based approach, Tosca enables business, QA and IT teams to…	N/A

Pricing

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Editions & Modules

Percy - Free: $0
per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
App Percy - Free: $0
per month 5000 free screenshots and 100 minutes of infrastructure
Test Observability - Unlimited Free: $0
Accessibility Testing - Free: $0
Test Observability - Observability Pro: $0.01
per month per test execution
Percy - Desktop: $0.02
per month per screenshot
App Percy - Visual Core: $0.02
per month per screenshot
Percy - Desktop & Mobile: $0.02
per month per screenshot
App Percy - Visual Cloud: $0.03
per month per screenshot
Live - Desktop: $39
per month per user
Live - Desktop & Mobile: $49
per month per user
App Live - Individual: $49
per month per user
Automate - Desktop: $129
per month 1 parallel test
Live - Team: $175
per month 5 users
App Live - Team: $175
per month 5 users
Accessibility Testing - Team: $199
per month 5 users
Automate - Desktop & Mobile: $225
per month 1 parallel test
App Automate - Device Cloud: $249
per month 1 parallel test
App Live - Team Pro: $289
per month 5 users
App Automate - Device Cloud Pro: $299
per month 1 parallel test
Automate - Enterprise: Contact sales team
Percy - Enterprise: Contact Sales
App Automate - Enterprise: Contact Sales
App Live - Enterprise: Contact sales team
Live - Enterprise: Contact sales team
App Automate - Device Cloud Pro + Visual Cloud: Contact Sales
App Percy - Enterprise: Contact Sales
Test Observability - Enterprise: Contact Sales
Accessibility Testing - Enterprise: Contact Sales

No answers on this topic

Offerings

Pricing Offerings
BrowserStack	Tricentis Tosca
Free Trial
Yes	No
Free/Freemium Version
No	No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No	No

Entry-level Setup Fee

No setup fee

Optional

Additional Details

—

More Pricing Information

Pricing Info

Request Pricing

Community Pulse
	BrowserStack	Tricentis Tosca
Considered Both Products	BrowserStack Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack The main factor contributing to the adoption of BrowserStack over the others we tested is its ease of adaptation. This tool doesn't require much training to adapt. Onboarding is faster, and UAECases testing is very fast, as it includes parallel testing automation capabilities. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack We found BrowserStack and never tried anything else. Incentivized Helpful? WT Wayne Teran Data Analyst Chose BrowserStack Chrome DevTools is free, but it takes a lot of time to manually switch devices/models, etc. And it doesn't let you switch to another system or browser (of course). When we did use it more, we'd also have to find other Chrome extensions to make up for things it didn't have built … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack We used LambdaTest, but ultimately it didn't work for us because it put us in a queue when we kicked off a testing job instead of starting immediately. Our continuous integration process is managed by Microsoft Azure DevOps, and the pipeline agents it provides have a 60-minute … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack Ability to evaluate across platforms is a unique feature in BrowserStack Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack It had all of the features we needed. The user interface is clean and accessible. AWS Device Farm was clunky, slow, and hard to use AND offered very little automation options / APIs. We really needed a solution that could become part of an automated testing pipeline and … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack BrowserStack is simpler and more user friendly than Sauce Labs and can be easily learned by any individual who is new to it and does not require much efforts. Also, BrowserStack is more trusted by the clients that we offer services to, and is always considered the best option … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack It has a wide range of devices for both mobile and web browsers. Incentivized Helpful? Chris Trudeau Head of Engineering Operations Chose BrowserStack TestRail Incentivized Helpful? Venkatesh Dharmaraj Senior Automation Test Engineer Chose BrowserStack BrowserStack is much compact and faster compared to katalon studio for mobile testing and supporting a lot of emulators compared to katalon.The licensing cost is also better compared to katalon and the user base of BrowserStack is high with official documentation well in place … Incentivized Helpful? Nilesh Kaingade Wow Automation Specialist Chose BrowserStack BrowserStack is often favored for its broader device coverage, ease of use, and strong local testing, while Sauce Labs shines with deeper analytics (video, network capture), AI-driven features, and robust performance for large-scale automation, especially for mobile/desktop … Incentivized Helpful? RS Rakesh Sharma Staff SDET Chose BrowserStack Tricentis Test Management for Jira Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack Before BrowserStack, I use local emulators. They were helpful for quick checks but not reliable for real world testing. Incentivized Helpful? Joseph Jesus Jimenez Sanchez Manual Tester QA / Profesor Chose BrowserStack well is a better option for doing testing. I used only Snagit for simple things in documentation, but usinga browser is more complete for the process of doing a large number of test cases. Snagit can crash your system with a lot of pictures, but a browser doesn't do it … Incentivized Helpful? ST Simran Tandon Full Stack Developer Chose BrowserStack Microsoft Teams Incentivized Helpful? Erin Hinnen Technical Project Manager Chose BrowserStack I actually tried BitBar back when they were still called CrossBrowserTesting. They offered a free trial when Browserstack got hacked in 2014. I wasn't a huge fan of their service vs Browserstack, mainly because the UI was less intuitive. I ultimately ended up going back to … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack Easy UI and seamless integration with CI/CD Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack The test results were not realistic and accurate. The user friendly dashboard in BrowserStack scores above other application Incentivized Helpful? G Satheesh Kumar Leader - QA Partnerships Chose BrowserStack Features, Cost effective. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack N/A - BrowserStack was the first software I've tried to address these requirements. Previously we've been limited to testing on a handful of devices and browser combinations that our team has physical access to. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack BrowserStack is user friendly, has more tools and integration with Jira. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack I've never used any competing products before. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack BrowserStack provided similar features at a lower cost than any other platform. All features surpass those of our competitors. Support from the BrowserStack team is awesome. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose BrowserStack I chose BrowserStack over Playwright because it was far more simpler to test test cases, builds were already set up and was just right because our web application was not as complex as others. We also used it because of the text and image validation which is what we really … Incentivized Helpful? OR Oshri Russak QA Engineer Chose BrowserStack A bit cheaper and I had experience with you in another company I worked at so I recommended you Incentivized Helpful?	Tricentis Tosca Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Compared to Selenium, Cypress, and Playwright, Tricentis Tosca stands out with its model-based approach and low-code automation, making it easier for non-developers to create and maintain tests. While Selenium, Cypress, and Playwright offer more flexibility and are … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Again, end users do not select Tosca. The decision making that leads to purchasing an expensive tool is generally done at a different level. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Selenium and Playwright Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Cutting across all the phases and areas of testing Tricentis stack helped address all the challenges that were reported by the test process optimization performed by one of our vendors. Tricentis qtest for test management, Tosca for test automation, and Neoload for test … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca When evaluating automation tools such as Selenium, Playwright, Cypress, UFT, Worksoft, and others, Tricentis Tosca stands out in four major areas: enterprise scale, SAP automation, maintenance effort, and end‑to‑end coverage. Incentivized Helpful? Hemesh Jaiswani Sr SDET Chose Tricentis Tosca Easy to learn and less resources needed. Incentivized Helpful? Lalithanjani Kancherla Data QA Analyst Chose Tricentis Tosca My org uses Tricentis Tosca Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca qTest is the "brain" of the suite. You can use just Tricentis Tosca and can be enough to have results, but if you want have the management of executions, results and even manual test, this is your app. Incentivized Helpful? Monish Correia QA Lead Chose Tricentis Tosca There are several low-code/no-code tools available for GUI testing, such as UI Path and Eggplant. However, based on my experience, Tosca stands out as the most user-friendly option. It allows testers to quickly build and execute automated GUI tests with minimal setup, making it … Incentivized Helpful? Sushmita Patil Senior Business Analyst Chose Tricentis Tosca Depending on the prices concern and fast execution Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca User friendly interface is key to any tool usage. If the features supported by tool is enormous but the interface is not easy to use, then the product will not reach its optimal usage. Tosca scores high numbers with this regard. The documentations and KB articles it supports … Incentivized Helpful? david leo Developer Chose Tricentis Tosca Its easy to use and reliable Incentivized Helpful? juan eng paw Senior Technical Manager SA Chose Tricentis Tosca UFT was mostly record and replay and Tricentis Tosca best fit our purpose as it was easier to create modules and make quick changes when needed. Overall easier and quicker to make changes to our existing test cases. therefore we haven't used UFT anymore. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Tricentis Tosca has higher stability than Certica Solutions Incentivized Helpful? Yogendra Singh Test Automation Expert Chose Tricentis Tosca As Tricentis Tosca is one of the first tools to implement the model based test automation, it is way ahead of the similar kind of tools. be it creating and innovating new strategies to overcome the existing hurdles faced during automation like, self healing feature is quite … Incentivized Helpful? AB Atanu Biswas Automation and Performance Test Lead Chose Tricentis Tosca Selenium, Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence and ACCELQ Incentivized Helpful? Mouleeswaran Andi E Test Analyst Chose Tricentis Tosca Even though selenium is open source tool we have lot restriction in selenium. Using selenium we can automate only web based application. If we need to automate other application we work with other tools. Maintenance of Selenium code is complex when compare to Tricentis Tosca. … Incentivized Helpful? Anant Joshi Sr. Director Chose Tricentis Tosca The overall user experience and the ease of use while automation ERP system was better in Tricentis Tosca. The integration was seamless especially for SAP and SFDC system. I think the maintenance efforts required in Tricentis Tosca is very less as compared to Katalon. The … Incentivized Helpful? Sneha Gangan Manore Senior Analyst Chose Tricentis Tosca This tool covers all from functional testing to rpa and mobile testing cloud based testing visual testing and accessibility testing is easily possible. It is easy to implement start work in less time. All the testing kinds performance can also be tested and customized reports … Incentivized Helpful? Ganesh Muralidharan Global Delivery Head Chose Tricentis Tosca Micro Focus UFT requires coding skills. Worksoft supports SAP very well but web app automation was challenging. Provar is only for Salesforce automation. Selenium required an automation engineer with Java knowledge and framework dependency. Tricentis Tosca did not require any … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Good on flexibility and provided much option to cover different aspects of automation testing. Incentivized Helpful? BW Bernd Weigl Teamleiter Quality Assurance Chose Tricentis Tosca Best Module and Scan approach, Libs rule, and PL Libs are the best things ever! Incentivized Helpful? Nikhil Puniyani Software Engineer Chose Tricentis Tosca As our product required wide rage of testing start from web testing to desktop automation also, we gone through the feature provided by Tosca and decided it will be good fit for end to end automation. Even though from our team no one is aware of how to use the tools, the guide … Incentivized Helpful? Vinayak Bandewar Test Architect Chose Tricentis Tosca Other tools are focused on limited applications or technologies. With Tricentis Tosca you can do almost everything which makes it one-stop solution for all needs.Tosca is codeless vs others which requires coding. Tosca has inbuilt repository which other tools lack. Tosca also … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Anonymous Chose Tricentis Tosca Tricentis Tosca provides a uniform interface for al testers and avoids the requirement for coding. Tricentis Tosca also offers test capabilities across the enterprise that other tools do not. Incentivized Helpful?

Features

BrowserStack

Tricentis Tosca

Automation Testing

Comparison of Automation Testing features of Product A and Product B
	BrowserStack - Ratings	Tricentis Tosca 7.2 Ratings 15% below category average
Record and Automate	00 Ratings	7.40 Ratings
Multi-Browser Testing	00 Ratings	8.40 Ratings
Mobile Testing	00 Ratings	7.00 Ratings
Test Scheduling	00 Ratings	7.60 Ratings
Test Management	00 Ratings	8.10 Ratings
CI/CD Tool Integration	00 Ratings	8.20 Ratings
Integrated Version Control	00 Ratings	1.00 Ratings
Parallel Testing	00 Ratings	8.00 Ratings
Object Recognition	00 Ratings	7.90 Ratings
Data-Driven Testing	00 Ratings	7.90 Ratings
Real Device Testing	00 Ratings	7.60 Ratings
Testing Reports & Analytics	00 Ratings	7.90 Ratings

Best Alternatives
	BrowserStack	Tricentis Tosca
Small Businesses	TestComplete Score 8.0 out of 10	BrowserStack Score 8.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies	ReadyAPI Score 6.1 out of 10	ReadyAPI Score 6.1 out of 10
Enterprises	ignio AIOps Score 8.1 out of 10	ignio AIOps Score 8.1 out of 10
All Alternatives	View all alternatives	View all alternatives

User Ratings
	BrowserStack	Tricentis Tosca
Likelihood to Recommend	8.8 (0 ratings)	8.9 (0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew	9.1 (0 ratings)	9.4 (0 ratings)
Usability	8.1 (0 ratings)	8.6 (0 ratings)
Availability	9.8 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Performance	5.7 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Support Rating	7.9 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
In-Person Training	7.3 (0 ratings)	8.0 (0 ratings)
Online Training	4.1 (0 ratings)	- (0 ratings)
Implementation Rating	9.1 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Configurability	8.3 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Ease of integration	8.2 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Product Scalability	9.9 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale	9.0 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale	8.2 (0 ratings)	10.0 (0 ratings)

User Testimonials
	BrowserStack	Tricentis Tosca
Likelihood to Recommend	As per my experience, BrowserStack is more suited for those organizations that have a remote work culture and also for those who need multiple device testing. Also, it is beneficial for those organizations that do not want to spend more on physical devices, as the devices update frequently in the market. It is not appropriate for those organizations which have lesser need of multi- device testing as the subscription model may not be feasible for them. Also a small organization with less number of employees would not opt for BrowserStack as it would be costlier for them. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	I still love to test some desktop applications as well as API's with Tosca. For web applications Tosca is OK but there are better alternatives. As a user, Tosca is really great to work with as you can set up a clean project quite fast. It is also quite easy to make a mess as a non-experienced user, using configurations (but in the wrong way), using TCD (but in the wrong way). It would help if there was more focus on generic test automation fundamentals, many more clear examples and instead of just mentioning the best practices, make users really understand the best practices so they know how and when to (not) apply them. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Pros	Test client website on 5x more platform. Provide a real device with features like media injection and Physical SIM testing for manual testing of a specific feature. Automate regression suite to execute parallel on multiple device. Provide an accessibility report for the website through automated scanning of the site using site.xml. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	It's one stop shop for all your test automation needs like - api layer, ui layer, load testing, mobile automation. It has excellent support for CI/CD and Devops environment which makes it very modern but much needed solution It can run in cross browser and cross devices with same test script and again saves a lot of time. Excellent results and dashboards gives nice view into results. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Cons	I wish it didn't time out so quickly. I often move back and forth between my native Mac OS system and browsers to BrowserStack for Windows browsers and it often times out so I have to start over. I am not sure why, but when I've been testing in BrowserStack for a long period of time - maybe over a couple of hours, it sometimes gets buggy and unresponsive or slow to respond. It makes it hard to tell if I'm experiencing an issue with the site I'm testing or if it's an issue with BrowserStack. If I'm wishing for the moon and stars, I'd ask for the ability to use BrowserStack to also test with JAWS screen reader. But I'm happy having NVDA. Verified User Anonymous Read full review	Documentation - struggled multiple times with features not explained very well, or not explained at all The only support is on Tricentis Forums, where, sometimes, based on 'luck' - you will open a support case, and wait few days until you get the chance to speak with someone from Tricentis and show case your issue Incentivized AI Alexandru Cristian Ion QA Engineer Read full review
Likelihood to Renew	It's simply a must-have tool. As a designer, I have to ensure my work is at least functional in older browsers. I also have to ensure that, when I design for mobile devices, any differences between platforms aren't problematic. BrowserStack allows me to test my work in a fraction of the time, with a whole lot more accuracy. Eric Karkovack Owner Read full review	Tricentis Tosca has consistently delivered value through its model‑based, low‑code automation, strong SAP ECC/S/4HANA and Fiori support, and the ability to reuse test assets across regression, upgrades, and transformation projects. Its coverage across SAP, Web, APIs, and desktop within a single platform reduces tool sprawl and maintenance effort, while features like risk‑based testing, CI/CD integration, and business‑readable tests align well with our quality and release goals Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Usability	So many options that it can be a little overwhelming, but the core functions are easy to find and use and it's usually not too hard to figure things out for the more complex tasks. Very easy to boot up a device and a specific browser from the dashboard to begin a manual website test. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	It can be a challenge for new users who have never used an automation tool. For example, it is hard to understand the layout of the screen and where to find how to update the data. The interface can be overwhelming at first. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Reliability and Availability	I rated BrowserStack's availability a 10 because it is consistently reliable, with minimal to no downtime or unplanned outages. The platform is accessible whenever needed, ensuring uninterrupted testing. Its robust infrastructure and proactive monitoring ensure a seamless experience, allowing us to meet deadlines without delays caused by availability issues and all Verified User Anonymous Read full review	No answers on this topic
Performance	The tests are fast considering the fact that they're Appium tests. I've seen tests reliably pass or fail when they're supposed to, with next to zero issues on the BrowserStack side of things. Tests launch only seconds after I kick off them off from my CLI. Incentivized Steven Boutcher QA Automation Engineer Read full review	No answers on this topic
Support Rating	I've not had much direct interaction with the BrowserStack support team. The help and community are great and we've not run into any issue that has really required us to reach out. I guess having a stable and easy to use system means you may never need to contact support. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	Tricentis team was very supportive. Support is expensive but they helped us at many level. Setting up timeline, implementation, precise questions on automation challenges. We had an account manager and technical people we could as to talk to. Support was generally timely and helping. They often proposed to come on site to help us which would cost more but could be helpful Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
In-Person Training	Yes, it was online training on meet, and trainer looks like skilled and technical strong, he has covered end to end all the features and he has answers all the queries. because of this trainings we are able to implement it by our own in the organization, thank you for support and training. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	It would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterif the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is better Incentivized david leo Developer Read full review
Online Training	It was a quick training from the support of browserstack, it was nice and easy to understand, thanks again for the support given by the team. and regularly I used to receive mails for training from support for any new feature they launch, I was able to spread same training to all my team and dev. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	okIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is betterIt would be better if the support is better Incentivized david leo Developer Read full review
Implementation Rating	I rated the implementation satisfaction an 8 because while it went smoothly overall, there were some challenges during the initial learning phase and integration with existing tools. Key insights include the importance of providing sufficient training upfront and ensuring seamless integration with other systems to minimize disruptions and improve adoption speed. Verified User Anonymous Read full review	No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered	We used LambdaTest, but ultimately it didn't work for us because it put us in a queue when we kicked off a testing job instead of starting immediately. Our continuous integration process is managed by Microsoft Azure DevOps, and the pipeline agents it provides have a 60-minute timeout. We need immediate tests instead of flipping a coin, which could cause a false positive failure due to timeouts. Verified User Anonymous Read full review	User friendly interface is key to any tool usage. If the features supported by tool is enormous but the interface is not easy to use, then the product will not reach its optimal usage. Tosca scores high numbers with this regard. The documentations and KB articles it supports are very helpful and allows us to solve our issues independently. Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review
Scalability	I may not be the best person to answer this as I am only using it for 1 department and at 1 site but will still try my best As far as Scalability for Devices for Mobile Automation is concerned, it gets a Solid 10, as the users can run cases on upto 10 device parallel and also have the best choices of devices to choose Incentivized Verified User Anonymous Read full review	No answers on this topic
Return on Investment	Browserstack improved our internal confidence level when it came to signing off on testing Browserstack improved the confidence level of our clients by decreasing the number of bugs found during PVT and providing an entry level opportunity for our clients to perform UAT using the same tools. Incentivized Erin Hinnen Technical Project Manager Read full review	Faster testing cycles - We were able to run around 4000 test cases in a week for a large workday implementation for multiple cycles. Increased risk coverage - We were able to increase regression coverage to 70% from scratch. Increased automation rates - High number of automation rates were achieved. Incentivized Vinayak Bandewar Test Architect Read full review
ScreenShots	BrowserStack Screenshots	Tricentis Tosca Screenshots