We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"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."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"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."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"Object identification is good."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"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."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"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."
"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."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"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."
"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."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
BlazeMeter is ranked 5th in Test Automation Tools with 41 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 9th in Test Automation Tools with 46 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One. See our BlazeMeter vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing 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.
