mabl vs. Tricentis Tosca

We haven't found a scenario yet where it hasn't been appropriate. We did have one function on our application that mabl couldn't do, but they solved it and got back to us very quickly. Our application is web-based and mabl is able to handle this very easily. We use the command line runner a lot. Being able to easily and quickly change from a cloud based run to a local run has been fantastic. Setting up flows and environments is a wonderful feature

Incentivized

Tricentis Tosca is well suited for packaged applications like SAP, Salesforce, Workday, etc. It also works well with API testing and Web UI testing. Tosca is highly suited for Projects which require a high level of collaboration between team members across different locations. It's less suited for mobile automation, Reporting, and test scenarios with high input data.

Incentivized

• mabl trainer - record and play back test cases
• Organization - labels and flows make this easy
• Customer support!

Incentivized

• 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

• Asserts could be easier to add, but they aren't terribly hard

Incentivized

• It does have a steep learning curve, A tool is often perceived capable of doing only what its user is able to achieve in accomplishing while using it. For this reason, its very necessary if for the team at Tricentis to continue doing the great work they are doing to train early adopters of this fantastic tool.

Incentivized

We aim to renew Tosca for our organization. What we lose in license cost is gained by having employee that do not need programming background. We also recoup a lot of the cost on the rapidity of automation. Only the support we might not use as much. I believe Tosca is here to stay at our organization

Incentivized

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

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

We ultimately selected mabl cause it most met our needs and our budget. We needed a low code UI automation test tool. We also have a suite of existing testing tools and other tools that it needed to be able to integrate with. Price was the only thing that ruled out some of the above tools, we are a small start up, and don't have a huge budget. Some tools listed didn't have the same functionality or ease of use with the record and playback. mabl works on our machines and integrates with our existing tools

Incentivized

Tricentis Tosca is codeless and therefore easier to use. It's a great tool for people that would start doing automation and have no coding background. It seems like it has the same capabilities as other test automation suites but I felt it lacked a bit of capabilities on the test management suite such as defects test suites organizations etc

Incentivized

• We are able to more quickly automate UI tests

Incentivized

• After implementing Tosca we were able to reduce the cycle time that was spent on executing regression tests manually. I would say TOSCA was able to reduce close to 30% of the time that was spent for executing test cases manually.

Incentivized