Selenium is open source software for browser automation, primarily used for functional, load, or performance testing of applications.
N/A
TestComplete
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
TestComplete is a GUI test automation tool that enables users of all skill levels to test the UI of every desktop, web, and mobile application. TestComplete is best suited for testers, automation engineers, and QA teams in any industry.
$2,256
per license
Tricentis Tosca
Score 8.9 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
Selenium
TestComplete
Tricentis Tosca
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Node-Locked Base
2,256
per license
Node-Locked Pro
3,950
per license
Float - Base
5,077
per license
Float - Pro
7,901
per license
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Selenium
TestComplete
Tricentis Tosca
Free Trial
No
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
Pay for only the modules needed. TestComplete Pro includes all three modules: desktop, web, and mobile, at a bundled price point, as well as access to the parallel testing engine, TestExecute.
TestComplete has additional add-ons, including TestExecute and the Intelligent Quality Add-On.
TestComplete is more like an enterprise automation testing tool, that consists of many built-in functions. The license is rather expensive https://smartbear.com/product/testcomplete/pricing/. TestComplete's user community is not as large as Selenium user. Smartbear's …
Customers are always spending less cost on tools and prefer open-source tools which leverage all applications Can be tailored your framework in selenium according to application Moreover CI/CD pipeline is easy in selenium compared to other tools Can be built custom test …
UFT is a paid tool from microfocus and able to automated alomsts all platforms but there is Fee for licensed versions software. TOSCA is also a paid tool from Tricentis which does not require coding skills from tester and implements mode based automation. where as selenium is …
In the end we did not select Selenium. For a company that is well established it is best to spend a little extra cash and get the support that a paid company offers. If something goes wrong you can easily contact them.
Selenium does not offer that although there are third-party …
HQ UFT, it is one of the best and has more abilities but it is too much expensive while Selenium is free. SmartBear TestComplete, same reason as UFT. Watir, it is a Selenium-like open source project but has less features and limited documentation.
TestComplete is easy to set up and allows you to map certain objects with it's play and record feature. We can then convert that to scripts and use those scripts to update other existing scripts if the Xpath is not being read properly. We compared it to Selenium, which you have …
Previously I was working on Selenium with Java for automating the test cases/scenarios and to perform regression testing in web applications. And for the last few months, I have been working with TestComplete on automating desktop and web applications. And I like the name …
UFT, TOSCA, and open-source Selenium/Cucumber based. The ease of use with TestComplete is comparable to TOSCA, but it is a lot cheaper and allows for a better ROI. UFT is better at recognizing elements and different technologies based on Java. TestComplete is easier to set up …
We aren't 100% sure that we will stick with TestComplete for our web-based UI testing for the long haul because Selenium is a bit lighter on the overhead front, but we definitely really like it for testing our standalone applications and utilities. As far as a complete testing …
Selenium gets a lot of mileage for being opensource and free, but in terms of features, ease of use, and the added support and development structure of an enterprise product, TestComplete is the clean cut winner.
We used before the Coded UI Tests which are in Visual Studio / Azure DevOps, and the tests were impossible to maintain and very very flaky. Then in 2015, we selected TestComplete, as it was clearly the tool with the most feature for desktop UI testing. Selenium was …
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases …
Below are the points why we selected TestComplete 1. Better UI. 2. Plenty of validation cases supports i.e. checkpoints. 3. Multiple scripting languages. 4. Better accuracy and robustness. 5. Good documentation and Video tutorials. 6. Great support team.
The major advantage over other tools is the ease of use. A chimp will be able to figure out TestComplete whereas the others require extensive coding knowledge
I have used UFT, Katalon Studio. UFT has robust object recognition engine than TestComplete. For example, Katalon Studio supports Groovy and Java so it is easier for programmers/testers to automate apps in java as it is a popular language, but TC doesn't support it.
»In
order to select the best tool to be used at Inspire Innovations, we have
defined our selection criteria based on price, functionalities, ease of use and
It's a great tool with a lot of in built features and support for cloud. In the market, there are many test tools available and there are many open source tools too. But this tool has some unique features which fair well.
We also evaluated Rational Functional Tester and QuickTest Pro. These other tools were a little more difficult to implement and very costly. They were not as flexible as TestComplete. The sales staff around TestComplete was friendlier and more responsive. They made us feel …
TestComplete was expensive as compared to the other tools that we used and did not live up to the expectation. Only good thing with TestComplete is that the test integration for multiple platform is pretty good and works well as compared to these individual tools as these are …
I have really minimum exposure with QTP and ALM, barely 2 months or so, for this reason I would not like to comment on how Tosca stacks up against them, but something that I really like about Selenium is that it is really simple and easy to setup, doesn't require a heavy …
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. …
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 …
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.
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 …
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 …
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.
Mostly the ease of use from day one by introducing the no-code approach for teams with non-technical contributors. Also, the amount of technologies it covers is greater than other tools that are specialized in web-only or API, for example.
When you have to test the UI and how it behaves when certain actions are performed, you need something that can automate the browsers. This is where Selenium comes to the rescue. If you have to test APIs and not the frontend (UI), I would recommend going with other libraries that support HTTP Requests. Selenium is good only when you have no choice but to run the steps on a browser.
Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched
For projects having huge set of test cases to be automated can be accommodated by Tricentis Tosca with proper folder structure and best practices implementations. Tosca will be less appropriate for organizations where the number of automation scripts are limited with hardly any scope of increasing the script count or the cost of automation will be more than the cost of having manual resources as Tosca is a licensed tool.
Selenium is pretty user-friendly but sometimes tests tend to flake out. I'd say roughly one out of twenty tests yields a false positive.
Selenium software cannot read images. This is a minor negative because a free plug-in is available from alternate sources.
Slowness may be a minor factor with Selenium, though this is an issue with basically any testing software since waiting on a site to execute JavaScript requires the browser to wait for a particular action.
TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.
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
We love this product mainly because of its high customization abilities and the ease of use. Moreover, its free and can be learned easily through online communities and videos. The tests are more consistent and reliable as compared to Manual tests. It has enabled us to test a large number of features all in one go, which would have impossible through manual tests. The reports generated at the end of the tests are really helpful for the QA and the development teams to get a fair view of the application.
We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.
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
For those who are unfamiliar with coding, there is a bit of a learning curve. There is plenty of helpful documentation and resources but it can take a little time to get the software up and running. Once you get the hang of how Selenium works, and what it can do, you realize how many things you can use it for, and how many processes you can automate.
It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.
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.
The Selenium app has a pretty fat community of users. For the problems we are experiencing, we are primarily receiving support from these communities. In addition, there is widespread service support. Instant support is given to the problems we experience when we need Online support. We and our team are happy to provide this support, especially before important deployment processes
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
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
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
We did everything we needed to use it. Now we can execute our tests on different operational systems and browsers running few tests simultaneously. We also implemented Appium framework to execute our tests on mobile devices, such as iPhones, iPads, Android phones and tablets. We use SauceLabs for our test execution and Jenkins for continuous integration.
If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers
At the time of adoption, there were not many other alternatives that were even close to being competitive when it comes to browser testing. As far as I know now to this day, there is still little competition to Selenium for what it does. Any other browser-based testing still utilises Selenium to interact with the browser.
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.
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
Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs
It really had a very good impact on our ROI. We were able to automate most of the apps and layers with in it and get a very short execution time which led to increased releases with in short span of time.
Time to market really improved and efficiency of developing scripts was not too bad.
With built in test dashboards, it was easy to pull metrics and share the insights with management.