ACCELQ Automate vs Ranorex Studio comparison

ACCELQ and Ranorex are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. ACCELQ is ranked #16 with an average rating of 9.0, while Ranorex is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.5. ACCELQ holds a 1.3% mindshare in TAt, compared to Ranorex’s 4.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ACCELQ users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

ACCELQ Automate

Read 1 ACCELQ Automate review

680 Views
512 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

2,853 Views
2,123 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

ACCELQ Automate

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ACCELQ Automate and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, OpenText and others in Test Automation Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Test Automation Tools Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,451 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

ACCELQ Automate

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

16th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (14th), Mobile App Testing Tools (4th), Regression Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of ACCELQ Automate is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 4.8%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature

We evaluated data testing for millions of records. As per architecture, it can efficiently run a few thousands of records. However, we couldn't implement it for millions of records. Thus, it works well for a small amount of data. We have 30 users for it in our organization and use it daily. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

Read full review

Aws V

IT Team Leader -Automation Manager at Citco

Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet

There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman. Additionally, expanding language support beyond C#, Java, and JavaScript to include Python would be beneficial. An AI feature that automatically detects automation object properties and suggests actions would be a great addition. So, in future releases, AI solutions for automated property identification would be helpful.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."

"Object identification is good."

"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."

"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 support dual or regression testing."

"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."

"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."

"When Ranorex is upgraded, the compatibility with other projects, in version control, in-house or on-premise, fails on occasion. However, overall, the stability is good."

"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."

"There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman."

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

"We paid €3,000 (approximately $3,300 USD) for this solution. When you add the runtime licenses it will be €3,500 (approximately $3,900 USD)."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,451 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ACCELQ Automate?

The platform contributes to faster test release cycles.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ACCELQ Automate?

I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ACCELQ Automate?

The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details. Additionally, there could be a capability to automatically generate automation scripts extracting the user data fr...

See all answers

What do you like most about Ranorex Studio?

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ranorex Studio?

I'd rate it around five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, not too cheap but not overly pricey.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?

See all answers

Comparisons

Katalon Studio vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 23% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 19% of the time

Testsigma vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 19% of the time

Eggplant Test vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 11% of the time

More ACCELQ Automate Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 24% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 1% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

April 2025

Download ACCELQ Automate product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

April 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Overview

The most powerful test automation tool for web, desktop, mainframes and more.

ACCELQ

Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

Ranorex

Sample Customers

FISCHER, optanix, ERICSSON, BenifitMall, QuickPivot, DIGITALFUEL, westcreek

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

April 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, OpenText and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,451 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.