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

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs Ranorex Studio comparison

OpenText and Ranorex are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #39, while Ranorex is ranked #19. OpenText holds a 0.3% mindshare in FT, compared to Ranorex’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.
OpenText Business Processin...
Read 7 OpenText Business Processing Testing reviews
  • 201 Views
  • 169 Comparison Views
83% willing to recommend
Ranorex Studio
Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews
  • 2,913 Views
  • 1,748 Comparison Views
95% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Business Processing Testing and Ranorex Studio are solutions for automated testing. Ranorex Studio appears to have an upper hand due to its diverse feature set and user-friendly deployment.

Features: OpenText excels in integration with SAP environments, comprehensive process management, and reusability of content. Ranorex Studio provides cross-platform testing for desktop, mobile, and web applications, includes a recording and playback feature, and supports C# and VB.NET for robust scripting.

Room for Improvement: OpenText could improve in simplifying its complex deployment, offering better customer support response times, and enhancing its user interface for non-technical users. Ranorex Studio may benefit from extended integration capabilities for enterprise systems, expanding its support for additional programming languages, and improving its cost models for broader enterprise adoption.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText has a complex deployment process needing specialized assistance, while Ranorex Studio offers a more straightforward deployment model. Ranorex also provides faster, more accessible customer service.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText generally has a higher setup cost due to its complex nature, impacting quick ROI. Ranorex Studio offers moderate pricing with quicker ROI, balancing robust features and cost-effectiveness.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: September 2025).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio
September 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 869,513 peers since 2012

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

OpenText Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
39th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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 (10th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.2%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Ranorex Studio3.2%
OpenText Business Processing Testing0.3%
Other96.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RR
Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases
There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.
Read full review
Aws V - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"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 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."
"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 scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"Object identification is good."
"The solution is stable."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
More Ranorex Studio pros
 

Cons

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"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."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
More Ranorex Studio cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"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)."
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Comparisons

No data available
Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio
Compared 23% of the time
Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio Logo
Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio
Compared 15% of the time
Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio Logo
Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio
Compared 13% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio
Compared 12% of the time
Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio Logo
Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio
Compared 9% of the time
More Ranorex Studio Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing
September 2025
OpenText Business Processing Testing reportDownload OpenText Business Processing Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
Ranorex Studio
September 2025
Ranorex Studio reportDownload Ranorex Studio product report
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
No data available
 

Overview

OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

OpenText

Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

Ranorex
 

Sample Customers

Migros Bank AG
Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio
September 2025
Free Report: OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.