Autify vs Tricentis Tosca
Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.
Entry price
Quote on request
Quote onlyQuote on request
Quote onlyWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Quote-based annual contracts sized by test runs.
Enterprise licensing only, negotiated annually. Six-figure contracts are normal at scale.
Free tier
Two-week free trial.
Open source
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Emerging
Autify, Inc. · since 2016
Widely used
Tricentis · since 2007
Strengths
- Very low barrier to a first working suite — recording plus a managed browser cloud.
- Maintenance burden is genuinely reduced by the self-healing model.
- Covers web and native mobile from one vendor.
- Unmatched coverage of enterprise packaged software, especially SAP end-to-end processes.
- Model-based design means one change updates every affected test case.
- Risk-based prioritisation is a real answer to eight-hour regression packs.
Limitations
- No self-hosted option.
- Limited support for complex data-driven scenarios.
- Smaller international presence and support footprint than the US vendors.
- Expensive, and priced for organisations with a procurement department.
- Steep learning curve; most customers buy consulting alongside the licence.
- Heavy and slow compared to modern code-first tools for plain web applications.
Best for
Small QA teams that need automation without an engineering hire.
Large enterprises running SAP or similar packaged systems where no open-source tool reaches.
All of these integrate with: Jira, Jenkins.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.