No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CrossBrowserTesting 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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.5%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio3.5%
CrossBrowserTesting1.4%
Other95.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
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

"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."
"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"With a small team of one onshore person and three offshore people, I was able to show the value of $90,000 savings for a project as a POC and the customer is currently using this tool for several other projects in their organization after seeing the ROI for one project."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"Cross browser testing and the ability to perform mobile test automation mean you do not need to buy two different solutions for mobile and web channels separately."
"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."
"Ranorex is more up-to-date and provides more support for testing."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
 

Cons

"Automated testing could be improved."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up, as I still sometimes experience lag, which no one loves."
"I had some problems with the local connection, but there is someone that can help us always on customer support chat."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"Snapshots for WPF applications taking too long than expected."
"The current version of Ranorex Studio IDE is based on an old version of SharpDevelop IDE (3.2), but this is going to change soon (planned update to SharpDevelop 4.x)."
"I would definitely say that the existing documentation of their API has a lot of room for improvement."
"There was one instance where I had an issue and contacted them for a solution; they were unable to provide it, and I ended up finding a workaround on my own."
"I encountered a problem during div element recognition. This point could be enhanced."
"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."
"Need support for other operating systems like Mac and Linux, and not just Windows."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"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."
"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."
"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
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 CrossBrowserTesting vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.