We performed a comparison between OpenText Business Processing Testing and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The automation engine is very strong, and it is very competitive in the market in terms of features. They develop a lot of features."
"Image recognition: It has allowed us to automate a GUI section of our product which involves drawing different topologies."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."
"Multiple scanning engines to automate many different applications."
"This tool has test data management capability along with test management."
"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."
"We have to automate thousands of test cases and complete end-to-end SAP on business processes. To manually execute these tasks, it would take us at least two months. By automating these tasks using Tosca, now it takes five to 10 days maximum. Tricentis Tosca is a codeless or scriptless automation tool."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."
"Setup wasn't that straightforward; it was more complex. It all depends on the environment, because there were a lot of errors on our applications. Therefore, it wasn't an easy setup for us."
"The Test Management options are still weak - improvement is outlined, but not yet visible. I"
"The product is not very stable when used with cloud storage. It is very hard to load the screen, making it difficult to use the tool in cloud storage."
"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."
"The solution is expensive compared to other tools in the market."
"There should be ease of data manipulation within automation test cases."
Earn 20 points
OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 37th in Functional Testing Tools while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 97 reviews. OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Does not require coding experience to use and comes with productivity and time-saving features ". OpenText Business Processing Testing is most compared with , whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Worksoft Certify, Postman and SmartBear TestComplete.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.