We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"I like the record and playback features. We also appreciate that it's not just writing on a script that we create. While we were browsing our web application, it automatically records all the clicks and movements of points. We also appreciate the fact that it provides screenshots of everything in the output."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"For our purposes it requires integration with other products to get out the results in the format we want them. Adding this to the product could improve it."
"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."
"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"The initial setup was difficult."
"It takes such a long time to use this solution that it may be worth looking into other free solutions such as TestProject or Katalon Studio, or paid solutions to replace it."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Eggplant Test, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText UFT One. See our Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression 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.
