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
27th
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
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio3.4%
CrossBrowserTesting1.5%
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

"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"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."
"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."
"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices."
"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"It has reduced the cost of production and operations."
"Easy to use - without any dev skills you can automate some nice things C# or VB.NET is used for development, and you can find a lot of information online Fast email support and a forum with several experienced users and Ranorex employees on it Online webinars to help you get started We can combine Ranorex with Jenkins and JIRA."
"We went with Ranorex due to its relative ease of use, and its support for automating desktop/WPF applications out of the box."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"It's improved our company in a numbers of ways, but most importantly it helps us save time and the report preparation is nice and easy."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"Object identification is good, it is easy to identify and convenient for scripting as well, which is a good thing for us."
 

Cons

"The speed to connect to mobile devices needs improvement, and sometimes the connection fails."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"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."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"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 encountered a problem during div element recognition. This point could be enhanced."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"More possibilities on mobile devices, as we have already encountered some problems with iFrames integrated in a web page."
"They need to improve their support of different web browsers along with Flash support."
"The stability is in the range of eighty-five percent of what I was expecting. We still have some issues."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"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."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"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)."
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Transportation Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

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: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.