Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BrowserStack vs Ranorex Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (9th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 8.1%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.3%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BrowserStack8.1%
Ranorex Studio3.3%
Other88.6%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Managing Technical Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing has accelerated releases and now needs smarter AI-driven test creation
The best features that BrowserStack offers include the ability to run manual and automated tests on real devices. We can create bugs, integrate it with other platforms like Jira or Azure, and use self-healing scripts with Selenium. We also have the test runs for different versions or with different frameworks, not just Selenium but with Playwright as well. Additionally, there are real-time dashboards and notifications sent when tests fail or when we need screenshots or recordings of test executions, and we can easily integrate this into our pipelines. BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by providing an out-of-the-box solution for whole test executions across different projects for our automobile customers. We have worked on around twenty to thirty projects, and the need for a stable, customizable single test execution platform that supports different platforms has been met. It has helped manage the entire quality assurance of the product efficiently. The measurable improvements due to BrowserStack include a significant efficiency gain, allowing the whole team to collaborate on testing and communicate faster. Also, the easier integration with project management tools has been beneficial. The documentation of findings has improved, which helps us share insights with different project stakeholders.
Aws V - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by saving money that would be spent on buying new devices."
"Maintenance of the solution is easy."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by ensuring that we don't have any surprises, especially on smaller devices."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"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 solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"I think a possible improvement for BrowserStack could be adding features such as sending SMS or making FaceTime calls because, as far as I know, those features are not available at the moment."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"The price is fine."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
"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."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was good.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
I feel there is not much to improve about BrowserStack.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.