mabl vs Tricentis Tosca

Quote on request

Quote on request

Quote-based, typically sold as an annual contract sized by test runs and users. Expect mid five figures for a team deployment.

Enterprise licensing only, negotiated annually. Six-figure contracts are normal at scale.

14-day free trial.

Established

mabl · since 2018

Widely used

Tricentis · since 2007

• Self-healing genuinely reduces maintenance on UIs that change often.
• Auto-captured visual, performance and accessibility signals on every run without extra setup.
• Very little infrastructure to own — no grid, no runners.

• 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.

• Cloud-only. If your application is not reachable from mabl's infrastructure, the setup gets complicated.
• Complex conditional logic hits the ceiling of the low-code model.
• Opaque pricing and a substantial minimum commitment.

• 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.

Mid-market teams that want broad automated coverage without hiring an automation team.

Large enterprises running SAP or similar packaged systems where no open-source tool reaches.