We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Regression Testing Tools."Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."
"By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"It's user friendly, scalable, and very stable and strong. It's cooperative, meaning that I can assess the test to check it and follow the flow of defects, and the developers and the business can use this tool to follow the test process."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports, and also some automation using EFT which works with ALM."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"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."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"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."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"I'd like to be able to improve how our QA department uses the tool, by getting better educational resources, documentation to help with competencies for my testers."
"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"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."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 7th in Regression Testing Tools with 46 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". 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". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.
