Tricentis qTest (formerly QASymphony) provides enterprise-level agile testing tools giving businesses visibility and control needed to ensure application quality in fast-paced development environments. Tricentis and QASymphony merged in summer 2018.
$1,200
per year per user
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…
Extensive integration options with various third-party tools, enabling seamless integration into existing workflows. Allows for flexibility and customization of workflows, fields, and permissions to adapt to unique testing requirements. Supports robust requirements traceability, …
I have worked on Jira, but i found it more difficult interface to handle. It was not user friendly. The defect management was also not impressive. qTest experience actually helped me to take decision while evaluating.
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 …
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.
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. …
Tricentis Tosca has more functionality and is easier to implement. It also has more compatibility with other applications, and the support is much more responsive.
Tricentis qTest integrates seamlessly with Jira, making it ideal for teams that manage user stories and defects in Jira while keeping test cases and execution in qTest. When paired with automation tools like tosca, Selenium, or WebdriverIO, qTest is excellent for aggregating both manual and automated test results in one place.
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.
As a fresher, when I started using qTest it was very handy and easy to understand.
It helps us trace the test cases that are used to test the quality in a single location
The main thing is its integration with JIRA as soon as we create a ticket we would be getting all the requirements in the qTest so it became easy for me
Ease of maintenance with the help of Reusable TestStep Blocks (Libraries)
Flexible and scalable execution infrastructure to support organizations to ramp up or ramp down the resources based on the requirement.
Various certification courses available on Tricentis Academy to enable users to learn all the available products based on the role desired by the user.
Creation of Execution packs based on the type of testing cycle
In requirements , we can't add multiple test cases at once, or search multiple cases at once, need to do one by one. Here actually qtest needs to improve.
Linking cloud hosted qtest and on-premise TOSCA is very difficult especially when you are working with client system with security wall. It requires tunnelling software which is not recommended.
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
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
First and foremost, getting access to the tool for any user for a specific project is easy. Once the user access is provisioned, in a matter of few clicks, he can understand the navigation and various tabs and features like the test plan, test set, test lab, test case creation, review and approval.
Tricentis Tosca supports a large number of technologies and applications. it is easier to start and progress on test automation using Tosca. It is a codeless tool which makes it easier to learn for even a entry level engineer.The modular approach makes it easier to create test cases and maintain them for future enhancements.
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
All of them offer formidable solutions in the test management realm, but each one caters to different niche and need. qTest distinguishes itself with its deep integration capabilities, especially with Agile and DevOps tools, enabling streamlined CI/CD process. Its modern, user-centric interface contrasts with ALM's more dated appearance and complex setup. While TestRail provides a clean user experience and caters to a broad spectrum of business, qTest's scalability, from SMBs to large enterprises, stands out. PractiTest's cloud-based solution is geared towards mid-sized companies, but qTest's flexibility, advanced analytics, and robust reporting grant teams actionable insights. qTest' approach to a more holistic test management closely aligning with modern software development practices
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
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.
