OpenText UFT Developer vs Ranorex Studio comparison

OpenText and Ranorex are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.8, while Ranorex is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.5. OpenText holds a 2.6% mindshare in FT, compared to Ranorex’s 3.4% mindshare. Additionally, 77% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 38 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,679 Views
1,028 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

1,952 Views
994 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT Developer and Ranorex Studio compete in the software testing tools market, focusing on automation across various environments. OpenText UFT Developer has an edge with its integration abilities, particularly beneficial in complex development cycles.

Features: OpenText UFT Developer is known for its versatility and seamless integration with tools like ALM and Jenkins. It supports various programming languages, allowing developers to use Java and C#, making it highly adaptable to different testing environments. Its developer-friendly interface facilitates smooth integration into the development lifecycle. Ranorex Studio is appreciated for its ease of use and strong automation capabilities across desktop, web, and mobile applications. It supports C# and VB.NET, known for its strong object recognition and detailed reporting features, enhancing testing efficiency.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT Developer needs enhanced cross-browser testing capabilities and better support for open-source frameworks. Performance improvements and integration with newer testing frameworks are also required. Ranorex Studio could improve its browser compatibility and support for non-Windows environments. It should also focus on enhancing object recognition in complex UIs and expanding overall language support.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both OpenText UFT Developer and Ranorex Studio offer on-premises deployment options, with cloud alternatives available. Technical support for OpenText UFT Developer varies, with some users citing slow response times. Ranorex Studio's technical support is generally well-regarded, though some users have specific unmet needs in their service experience.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT Developer is viewed as an expensive solution suitable for larger organizations with bigger budgets, given its costly per-user license. However, its capabilities can justify the investment across testing teams. Ranorex Studio also has a high price point but is considered appropriate for its offered features, with flexible licensing options like floating licenses. Both tools offer significant returns on investment through increased automation efficiency when widely adopted within an organization.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,873 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 UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

12th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

15th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities

OpenText UFT Developer ( /products/opentext-uft-developer-reviews ) is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework ( /products/framework-reviews ), and they work well together.

Read full review

Aws V

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.

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 most valuable feature is stability."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."

"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"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 most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."

"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"Object identification is good."

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."

"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

"The pricing could be improved."

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."

"The tool could be a little easier."

"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"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."

"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."

"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."

"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."

"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."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."

"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."

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"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."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"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."

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

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?

There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object.

See all answers

What do you like most about Ranorex Studio?

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ranorex Studio?

I'd rate it around five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, not too cheap but not overly pricey.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 57% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 17% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 23% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

Telerik Test Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 2% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

May 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

No data available

Overview

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

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

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Ranorex Studio report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation 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.