BlazeMeter vs Ranorex Studio comparison

Perforce and Ranorex are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Perforce is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.0, while Ranorex is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0. Perforce holds a 0.6% mindshare in FT, compared to Ranorex’s 3.4% mindshare. Additionally, 94% of Perforce users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

BlazeMeter

Read 49 BlazeMeter reviews

430 Views
167 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

1,905 Views
958 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

BlazeMeter

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

BlazeMeter and Ranorex Studio are industry players in performance testing and UI test automation respectively. BlazeMeter is often preferred for load testing due to its scalability and cloud capabilities, while Ranorex Studio stands out for UI test automation with robust object recognition.

Features: BlazeMeter facilitates scalable load testing, integrates with tools like New Relic, and supports cloud-based simulations. Ranorex Studio automates tests across desktop, web, and mobile applications with C# scripting, provides powerful object recognition through Ranorex Spy, and integrates with CI tools like Jenkins.

Room for Improvement: BlazeMeter can enhance its reporting and customization capabilities, improve load generator provisioning, and refine integrations. Ranorex Studio could expand support to macOS and Linux, advance its parallel test execution features, and improve object recognition for Outlook add-ins.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BlazeMeter offers deployment flexibility across cloud and on-premises platforms but receives mixed reviews on customer service. Ranorex Studio, typically for on-premises deployment, is noted for responsive support yet some users desire more comprehensive documentation.

Pricing and ROI: BlazeMeter offers competitive pricing with substantial ROI through cost savings and test efficiency. Ranorex Studio, although more expensive with per-license costs, provides a comprehensive feature set that can justify the investment by enhancing automation efficiency and reducing manual testing costs.

To learn more, read our detailed BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,168 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

BlazeMeter

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

10th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

16th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BlazeMeter is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Manoj Raghavendra

Director at SMKR Consultancy LLP

Provides global load simulations without managing infrastructure and offers built-in reporting features

BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for. The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use. Additionally, if there is no host in preferred locations such as some Asian or Middle Eastern countries, it might not be convenient to use BlazeMeter.

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

"One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure."

"It is focused on concurrency testing, which has been especially beneficial for us. Their previous experiences had caused major setbacks."

"With the help of the Mock Services, we are overcoming everything. Wherever we are facing issues, whether they will be long term or temporary, by implementing the Mock Services we can bypass the faulty components that are not needed for our particular testing."

"For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."

"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."

"There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to go and compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that."

"The user interface is good."

"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."

More BlazeMeter pros

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

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

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

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

"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."

"Object identification is good."

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

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within Runscope would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes."

"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."

"One problem, while we are executing a test, is that it will take some time to download data. Let's say I'm performance testing with a high-end load configuration. It takes a minimum of three minutes or so to start the test itself. That's the bad part of the performance testing... every time I rerun the same test, it is downloaded again... That means I have to wait for three to four minutes again."

"BlazeMeter needs more granular access control. Currently, BlazeMeter controls everything at a workspace level, so a user can view or modify anything inside that workspace depending on their role. It would be nice if there was a more granular control where you could say, "This person can only do A, B, and C," or, "This user only has access to functional testing. This user only has access to mock services." That feature set doesn't currently exist."

"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."

"From a performance perspective, BlazeMeter needs to be improved...BlazeMeter has not found the extensions for WebSockets or Java Applet."

"BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for."

"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."

More BlazeMeter cons

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"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."

"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."

"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."

"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."

"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."

"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."

"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an averagely priced product."

"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution."

"My company has opted for a pay-as-you-go model, so we don't make use of the free version of the product."

"When compared with the cost of the licenses of other tools, BlazeMeter's license price is good."

"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."

"The product isn't cheap, but it isn't the most expensive on the market. During our proof of concept, we discovered that you get what you pay for; we found a cheaper solution we tested to be full of bugs. Therefore, we are willing to pay the higher price tag for the quality BlazeMeter offers."

"The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs."

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."

More BlazeMeter pricing and cost advice

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

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

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

"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)."

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

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

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How does BlazeMeter compare with Apache JMeter?

Blazemeter is a continuous testing platform that provides scriptless test automation. It unifies functional and performance testing, enabling users to monitor and test public and private APIs. We ...

See all answers

What do you like most about BlazeMeter?

It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BlazeMeter?

BlazeMeter's pricing depends on the type of account used. They offer multiple account types, with cost variations based on features accessible under each account.

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

Apache JMeter vs BlazeMeter

Compared 45% of the time

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs BlazeMeter

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs BlazeMeter

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs BlazeMeter

Compared 4% of the time

k6 Open Source vs BlazeMeter

Compared 4% of the time

More BlazeMeter Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 24% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 8% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter

June 2025

Download BlazeMeter product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

June 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Also Known As

JMeter Cloud

No data available

Overview

BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.

The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.

Perforce

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

DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub

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

Buyer's Guide

BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Free Report: BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation 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.