TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca: Detailed Comparison 2025

Looking at new test automation tools? Then you’ve probably asked yourself:

“Will this actually work for my team? Or will it turn into another thing we have to constantly fix?”

It’s a fair question. Plenty of tools look great in a demo, but once you're dealing with real tests, deadlines, and shifting UIs, things get messy fast.

That’s why this comparison focuses on two solid, but very different, platforms: TestResults and Tricentis Tosca.

• TestResults is built for agile teams and non-technical testers. It’s fast to pick up, doesn’t need a lot of setup, and works out of the box with natural language prompts.
• Tosca is made for bigger companies with established QA teams. It comes with more features and flexibility, but also more complexity.

If you’re not sure which one fits your setup, this guide will help. We’re breaking things down by what really matters: test creation, maintenance, platform support, ease of use, and overall cost, plus who each tool is actually built for.

Quick overview: Which tools fits my needs?

TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca: key differences

🧪 Technical Capabilities

Web Testing: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

When it comes to browser coverage, TestResults offers a comprehensive testing environment that supports all major browsers including Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. This makes it a strong fit for teams working across a range of operating systems and user scenarios. The tool is designed to work seamlessly across environments, giving QA teams peace of mind that browser-specific bugs will be caught early.

Tricentis Tosca supports Chrome, Firefox, and Edge, covering the most commonly used browsers in enterprise settings. However, it notably lacks Safari support, which could be a limitation for teams needing full macOS/iOS browser coverage. This gap can pose risks when testing web apps for Apple users or ensuring cross-platform compatibility.

Mobile Testing: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults includes built-in support for Android and iOS testing without additional charges or configuration. Whether your team wants to run tests on-premises or connect to a mobile farm, TestResults offers both options out of the box. This is ideal for QA teams looking for flexibility and speed without investing in extra tools or setups.

On the other hand, Tricentis Tosca requires a separate Mobile Engine add-on to enable mobile testing capabilities. This not only introduces extra cost but also additional complexity during setup. It’s a more involved process that may slow down onboarding and time-to-value, especially for teams unfamiliar with Tosca’s ecosystem or mobile configurations.

Desktop Testing: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults provides full support for Windows desktop applications, including legacy systems that many enterprises still rely on. This makes it well-suited for companies undergoing digital transformation or working with older tech stacks. The tool’s behavioral automation adapts well to UI changes, helping reduce maintenance for desktop tests.

Tricentis Tosca also supports desktop application testing and is especially known for its capabilities with enterprise software such as SAP. While it's robust in handling complex enterprise systems, the setup and modeling involved can require more initial effort. Tosca’s desktop automation strengths are undeniable, but best leveraged in highly structured environments with the resources to manage them.

API Testing: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

The core difference between TestResults and Tosca in API testing comes down to focus and flexibility. TestResults has a dedicated API testing module that lets you test APIs directly, without needing a user interface. This means you can validate backend systems early, test services independently, and fit your API checks neatly into your CI/CD pipeline. It’s a standalone capability built for modern software systems that rely heavily on APIs.

Tosca, on the other hand, focuses mainly on UI-based testing. Its API testing is more of an add-on, used to check API behavior during a full user journey. That means you’re often testing the UI and API together, rather than being able to isolate and work with APIs on their own. This works for simple flows, but makes it harder to scale, reuse, or run fast API checks before the UI is built.

Parallel Executions: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

Parallel execution is a major advantage of TestResults. With highly scalable, out-of-the-box parallelism, teams can run multiple tests across different environments without any manual configuration. This drastically reduces total testing time and accelerates the feedback loop, making it an excellent choice for CI/CD pipelines or fast-paced development cycles.

Tricentis Tosca also supports parallel execution, but it doesn’t come preconfigured. Teams need to implement a custom setup to enable it, which can lead to added complexity and longer ramp-up times. If speed and minimal overhead are priorities, TestResults delivers a more seamless experience in this area.

Deployment Options: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults is designed with flexibility in mind, offering cloud-native deployment as well as on-premises or hybrid models. This allows teams to choose the setup that best matches their infrastructure, security needs, or compliance constraints. Whether you're scaling tests in the cloud or operating in a tightly regulated environment, TestResults can adapt to your deployment requirements.

Tricentis Tosca supports both on-prem and cloud deployments too, but on-prem setups require more infrastructure investment and configuration. While its cloud capabilities have improved, organizations looking for a fully cloud-native experience may find TestResults more aligned with their needs, especially when agility and scalability are top priorities

Enterprise Governance: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults is built to meet compliance-heavy needs, offering audit-ready, revision-based reporting that provides clear traceability for every test execution. This is especially important in regulated industries like healthcare, finance, and manufacturing, where detailed logs and evidence-based results are not just preferred, they’re mandatory.

Tosca supports risk-based testing and offers audit trails as part of its enterprise governance features. While this ensures proper documentation and accountability, the system can be more rigid and complex to navigate. TestResults stands out by offering a simpler, more visual governance experience that’s easier for both technical and non-technical stakeholders to understand.

Test Automation Type: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults uses a user-centric, GenAI/NLP-based approach to test automation, allowing users to create tests in plain English and rely on visual, behavioral modeling. This drastically lowers the barrier to entry and allows business analysts, testers, and developers to collaborate without needing deep automation knowledge. It also reduces maintenance, as the automation is more resistant to UI changes.

Tosca, on the other hand, follows a model-based automation framework. While powerful and structured, it requires teams to map out applications and keep models updated as the system evolves. This means more overhead and higher reliance on specialized roles, beneficial for large enterprises with stable processes, but less ideal for fast-moving or resource-constrained teams.

🧑‍💻 User Experience

Learning Curve: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults is built so that even non-developers, like business analysts or product managers, can automate tests without needing a programming background. 

Because test steps can be written in plain language and automated with AI, there’s no need for a long onboarding process or technical setup. This means you're not limited to a small pool of test automation experts: you can involve more people in testing and free up your developers to focus on building features.

Tricentis Tosca takes a different approach. Its model-based setup still removes the need for coding, but new users often need formal training to understand how to create and maintain models. Getting started usually takes more time, especially if your team is new to automation or doesn’t have prior Tosca experience.

Test Creation: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults uses GenAI to help users automate test cases by writing prompts in plain language. You describe what you want to test, and the system handles the automation logic behind it. This makes it easier for non-technical users to get started and cuts down the time needed to go from idea to working test, especially across different devices and applications.

Tosca, on the other hand, uses model-based automation. Instead of writing out scripts, users build application models and define reusable test steps within those models. It reduces the need to code but comes with more upfront setup and maintenance. New users may face a steeper learning curve, as they need to learn how to build and keep those models up to date.

Language Support (SUT): TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults can handle system-under-test (SUT) interfaces in multiple languages without requiring separate configurations or additional layers. This is particularly valuable for companies operating in multilingual environments or developing international applications. Tests stay consistent across language variations thanks to the behavioral automation model.

Tosca does support language-based testing, but model adjustments are often needed to accommodate different language UIs. This means extra work for testers managing multilingual environments, as each language may require tweaks to the test models, introducing a higher chance of errors or delays.

Reusability: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

With TestResults, reusing existing components is simple. The platform relies on visual blocks and behavioral patterns that can be quickly reused across test cases. This streamlines the creation of new tests and reduces redundant work across large testing teams.

Tosca also allows for reuse via modular test design, which is a strong point of its framework. However, it requires careful management of these structures and dependencies. While this is effective for enterprise teams with dedicated test architects, it can add complexity in fast-moving agile teams.

Automation Effort: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults dramatically lowers the effort required to automate test cases by eliminating the need for coding or technical scripting. Its natural language interface and AI-powered assistance make it ideal for teams looking to scale automation quickly without over-relying on developers or specialized roles.

In Tosca, automation effort depends largely on the system’s complexity. Simple processes can be set up with reasonable speed, but more complex applications may require significant time and expertise. The modeling process itself is powerful but demands a more deliberate, technical approach that can slow down rapid iterations.

Test Maintenance: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults helps reduce the maintenance burden by avoiding fragile locators. It interacts with applications the way a real user would, using behavioral psychology-based automation. This means small UI tweaks, like moving a button or changing its color, won’t immediately break your tests. Instead, TestResults flags those changes, and it’s up to your team to decide if they matter or not.

For example, if a button turns from red to blue, TestResults doesn’t fail the test unless you've told it that color matters. It gives you control over what’s considered a bug and what isn’t.

Tosca, meanwhile, still requires regular updates to its models and test data when the application changes. Its model-based approach can reduce the need to write scripts from scratch, but keeping models in sync still takes effort and adds to the QA team’s ongoing workload.

Team Onboarding: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults stands out with its fast onboarding and personal guidance. New users can start testing within hours, and the company offers responsive support to help teams get up to speed. This is especially useful for agile teams that need to ramp up testing quickly without formal processes slowing them down.

Tosca’s onboarding takes longer due to its more technical nature and the need for model-based setup. While comprehensive training is available, it often requires dedicated time and resources, something smaller teams or lean organizations may not always have.

Dashboard: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

TestResults features a visual, real-time dashboard that displays execution history and evidence for each test. The simplicity and clarity of the UI make it easy for stakeholders at all levels to track quality and make informed decisions without digging through complex reports.

Tosca offers a centralized dashboard with execution monitoring and analytics. However, its UI can feel dense and overwhelming for users not familiar with the platform. While the functionality is there, it may take extra effort to extract the insights you need in a fast-moving environment.

Reporting: TestResults vs. Tricentis Tosca

Reporting in TestResults is built around clarity and collaboration. Each test produces evidence-based results that can be easily shared with developers and stakeholders. This makes handovers efficient and increases transparency across the team, especially in compliance-heavy industries.

Tosca provides built-in reporting features as well, but users often find them difficult to navigate. While the reports are detailed and comprehensive, extracting meaningful, easily digestible insights requires training or technical support, slowing down feedback loops and cross-team collaboration.

🔌 Integration & Ecosystem

CI/CD Integration: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults offers native integration with Jenkins, GitLab, Jira, Azure, and XRay, enabling seamless implementation of test creation and automation testing within your development workflows. This is a huge benefit for agile teams that rely on rapid iteration and need their software testing tools to move as fast as the codebase.

Tricentis Tosca supports CI/CD tools as well, but it often requires extra configuration to get everything running smoothly. For teams with less time or fewer resources to dedicate to setup, this can be a barrier. In environments where multiple scripts and platforms need to be tested quickly, TestResults proves more flexible and scalable.

ALM Tools: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

With REST API, native Jira/XRay support, and compatibility with over 3,000 tools via Zapier, TestResults is one of the most integration-friendly automation testing tools on the market. This level of connectivity makes it easy to align your test management workflows with existing systems across QA and development teams.

Tosca’s integrations are more limited, with fewer out-of-the-box connectors. As a model-based tool, it’s powerful, but also more rigid. Teams managing regression tests or trying to scale across multiple systems may struggle to get the kind of extensibility TestResults offers natively.

Test Management: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults delivers real-time dashboards, detailed test history, and evidence-backed execution tracking. These features support better collaboration and provide crucial visibility into both manual and automated test scenarios, especially important when managing multiple environments or stakeholders.

Tosca offers centralized test management, but its interface can be difficult to navigate. While suitable for large enterprise setups, smaller teams may find it harder to manage large volumes of regression or functional testing data through its more structured, model-based format.

Third-Party APIs: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults provides an open REST API with high extensibility, allowing your team to build custom integrations or connect with third-party systems to extend the functionality of your testing tools. This is ideal for companies that need flexibility when managing test data, user environments, or toolchains.

Tosca includes API support, but it’s more rigid and less adaptable to custom workflows. For teams that want to automate processes beyond test creation, like syncing results with internal dashboards or triggering alerts, TestResults is the more adaptable solution.

💰 Licensing

License Model: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults keeps its pricing simple and scalable. With both user-based and execution-based licensing models, it caters to startups, small companies, and large enterprises alike. This transparency is a valuable feature that allows teams to manage costs as their projects grow.

Tricentis Tosca, however, uses a traditional enterprise licensing structure that is often harder to understand and more expensive upfront. While it delivers value in structured, high-level deployments, the complexity of its model can deter smaller teams or those scaling gradually.

Hidden/Extra Costs: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

All essentials, including mobile support, onboarding, and technical help, are included in the base offering from TestResults. There are no surprise charges for training or support, which makes budgeting easier for project managers and procurement leads.

Tosca often comes with additional costs for its Mobile Engine, test data management modules, and required training sessions. For teams already dealing with frequent upgrades, complex environments, and data integrity concerns, these extra costs can quickly add up.

💬 Support & Community

Official Support: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults delivers responsive support via email and phone, with personal onboarding and modern documentation. This is a major benefit for teams that need reliable, fast answers, especially during critical phases like test creation, release cycles, or troubleshooting API testing.

While Tosca provides enterprise-level support, response times are typically slower and onboarding can feel less personalized. For agile teams moving quickly across environments and technologies, this could create roadblocks that delay testing and deployment.

Community: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults offers growing community support through modern user guides, personalized onboarding, and responsive customer care. The platform focuses on keeping users connected via direct support and fast feedback loops. This approach works well for agile teams that value speed and clarity over navigating big forums.

Tosca, on the other hand, has an established community, especially within large enterprise circles. It’s a useful resource for teams running model-based test automation at scale, but may feel less approachable for newcomers or those from smaller companies with less formalized processes.

Documentation: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults’ documentation is constantly updated and written in a way that’s easy for all users to understand. Whether you’re setting up regression tests or building out complex automation workflows, you’ll find the guides both clear and current.

Tosca’s documentation is thorough but often criticized for being dense and outdated. For newer team members or manual testers transitioning to automation, this can create friction and slow down learning curves.

Training: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

With TestResults, training is optional and flexible, choose between quick self-service resources or a guided setup. This speeds up adoption and reduces the burden on internal leads to onboard new users.

In contrast, Tosca requires mandatory certification and structured training programs. While comprehensive, it can feel overwhelming, especially for teams under pressure to automate quickly or manage multiple projects at once.

📈 Roadmap & Future-Proofing

AI/ML Integration: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults was built with modern tech in mind and includes AI-driven test creation and maintenance. You can generate test flows from simple prompts, reducing the time it takes to build and update scripts across different browsers or platforms.

Tosca is still catching up in this area. While the company has acknowledged AI’s role in future testing, it remains largely a model-based test automation solution. The automation is robust but requires significantly more manual input compared to TestResults' AI-enhanced workflows.

New Tech Compatibility: TestResults vs Tricentis Tosca

TestResults thrives in fast-paced tech environments. It’s designed to handle rapid software changes, UI overhauls, and shifting test scenarios without constant rewrites. This makes it a strong fit for teams managing frequent deployments and varied user experiences.

Tricentis Tosca, although powerful, requires regular model rebuilds to remain aligned with changing systems. This introduces overhead for teams already juggling regression, data, and release demands, slowing down their ability to respond to updates across web applications or microservices.

Which test automation tool should you choose?

TestResults is the better choice if you want a low-maintenance, AI-driven automation solution that allows both technical and non-technical users to automate and maintain test cases efficiently, even with complex enterprise software. It’s designed for modern CI/CD pipelines, offers seamless integration with other tools, and reduces the overall effort needed to keep tests up to date.

Tricentis Tosca is ideal for teams that already work within SAP environments or those who prefer model-based testing and have the resources to manage the initial setup and ongoing maintenance. While it offers robust capabilities, it requires more effort to integrate and scale. Additionally, adapters for different technologies are often charged separately, which can increase the total cost of ownership.

Ultimately, the right choice depends on your team’s needs. If you’re looking for a scalable, easy-to-use test automation tool that minimizes maintenance, TestResults stands out. And we’re here to chat if you need to find out how our product can assist your business projects.

👉 And if you're currently using a different tool (either Tosca or another one)? No worries! You can easily migrate your testing workflows to TestResults without starting from scratch. Reach out and we’ll help you make the switch, step by step.