Compare Copado Robotic Testing and Tricentis Testim 
- Users report that Tricentis Testim excels in test feedback, achieving a perfect score of 10.0, which reviewers say allows for immediate insights and adjustments during the testing process.
- Reviewers mention that Copado Robotic Testing shines in test variety, scoring 9.4, which users say provides a broader range of testing scenarios, making it suitable for diverse applications.
- G2 users highlight Tricentis Testim's ease of setup with a score of 9.5, with users on G2 stating that the onboarding process is straightforward and user-friendly, reducing the time to get started.
- Users say that Copado Robotic Testing has a strong emphasis on automation organization, scoring 8.9, which reviewers mention helps in maintaining structured and efficient testing workflows.
- Reviewers report that Tricentis Testim's test history feature scores a perfect 10.0, with users noting that it provides comprehensive tracking of past tests, which is crucial for regression testing.
- Users on G2 mention that Copado Robotic Testing's reliability, scoring 9.2, is a significant advantage, as reviewers say it consistently delivers accurate results, enhancing overall confidence in the testing process.
It just works. It can handle the most complex js frameworks like Salesforce Lightning Experience.
The first setup was not very straightforward, and if you’re new to automation it does take some time to get used to. For non-technical folks, the learning curve can feel a bit heavy. I’ve also noticed that when we run bigger test suites, the speed could be...
No Code required for UI Tests Record and play functionality for testing makes a non-technical person able to test an app Very user friendly unlike Ghost Inspector and Screenster New features could be added to the regression suite for testing in no...
It's not ideal for teams like mine that prefer tools with a balance of high flexibility and low to no code options
It just works. It can handle the most complex js frameworks like Salesforce Lightning Experience.
No Code required for UI Tests Record and play functionality for testing makes a non-technical person able to test an app Very user friendly unlike Ghost Inspector and Screenster New features could be added to the regression suite for testing in no...
The first setup was not very straightforward, and if you’re new to automation it does take some time to get used to. For non-technical folks, the learning curve can feel a bit heavy. I’ve also noticed that when we run bigger test suites, the speed could be...
It's not ideal for teams like mine that prefer tools with a balance of high flexibility and low to no code options