OpenText UFT One vs Ranorex Studio comparison

You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpenText Logo
5,640 views|3,414 comparisons
Ranorex Logo
1,326 views|1,004 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Mobile App Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: September 2023).
734,024 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Q&A Highlights
Question: SAP GUI Testing Tool
Answer: Thanks all, it's encouraging to see so much support and responses
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good.""It is a stable solution.""The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent.""Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways.""The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great.""The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms.""The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier.""The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

More OpenText UFT One Pros →

"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 solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback.""The solution is stable.""The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance.""I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy.""The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

More Ranorex Studio Pros →

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent.""The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile.""I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution.""Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis.""It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower.""They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests.""The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features.""The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."

More OpenText UFT One Cons →

"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.""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.""The solution's technical support team could be responsive.""The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler.""The solution does not support dual or regression testing.""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.""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.""I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."

More Ranorex Studio Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The price is one aspect that could be improved."
  • "Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
  • "The price is reasonable."
  • "HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."
  • "It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
  • "The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
  • "The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
  • "Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
  • More OpenText UFT One Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
  • "Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
  • "This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
  • More Ranorex Studio Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    734,024 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Answers from the Community
    Anonymous User
    it_user83412 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user83412 (Vice President at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees)
    Real User

    All of these solutions are based on scripts and face the associated limitations. Test data management, parameterization, dynamic TBOMs, BPCA, SolMan integration and script maintenance all pose potential issues. I'd recommend looking at Tricentis Tosca or Worksoft, both of which provide scriptless automation for SAP GUI. Tosca also supports Fiori and NWBC natively as well as over 30 different UI and API technologies.
    [FULL DISCLOSURE: I work for Tricentis, so obviously biased, but we serve many SAP clients]

    gagneet - PeerSpot reviewergagneet (SAI Global)
    Real User

    Have used HPE UFT and SAP TAO for testing SAP applications. SAP TAO is more oriented towards the use of SAP by the Technical Users, while you can structure your tests in HPE UFT to be more business oriented and UX-driven. The limitations for these tools are as have been iterated above the use of the Scripting Language and more times the use of 'Record and Play' methods to automate the tests.

    As mentioned above integration with HP ALM (and BPT) makes the whole process easier to comprehend and work on from a Business viewpoint, and when your end users are basically Business users with limited Technical use. That said, you can try the latest SAP testing with the TOSCA tool also, which now provides the majority of the SAP 'modules' (aka objects) out of the box. This is a scriptless tool and with v9.x has the ability to do record and play and actual 'Exploratory' testing wherein the user can just switch it ON and record and later these steps are translated back into Test Case steps (much like TAO).

    TestComplete is also good, but you need C# knowledge for most of the scripting work, otherwise it is a cheaper option to any of the other tools available. Again, you need to be mindful that someone needs to create the initial framework and then users can work on it. This tool is more helpful when doing some Unit Tests.

    I am not sure of Ranorex, as have not used it.

    it_user344235 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user344235 (Testing Industry & Testing Solutions adviser - seeking opportunities at a tech vendor)

    It's been a while since I have used SmartBear, but I do know with HP & Ranorex that you will need to have more a development background for both your test logic and object recognition. If your testers are more developers, then you'll be ok. Will be happy to share other options to look at.

    it_user357144 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user357144 (IT Professional (Business/Technical Analyst, Change/Release Management, Project Manager) at The281Group)

    Please checkout the following links for HP solutions:



    it_user224220 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user224220 (User)


    I tested SAP with HPE UFT including BPT with a high level of success. The major difference between TAO and UFT is that UFT approaches testing from a user/business perspective while TAO is more oriented towards technical part by accessing individually each transaction. We were in System and later Acceptance Test so UFT was the tool of choice. HPE UFT detected objects ok, we could access all transactions and compose whatever scenarios crossed our minds. In order to do that we integrated with HP ALM who offered BPT which made the work a lot easier. We knew the tool so no training was necessary but the cost of licenses was quiet high.

    Hope it helps

    it_user457878 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user457878 (User at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees)
    Real User

    UFT will support or Tricentis TOSCA .

    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well… more »
    Top Answer:Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate.
    Top Answer:A person who buys the solution for the first time will not have a step-by-step approach to using it. I have worked with Cypress, Selenium RC, WebDriver, and other tools. I have been automating… more »
    Top Answer:This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors. The price of the solution was approximately €900. The upgrades tend to be a little less expensive.
    Top Answer:Presently, the solution only supports Windows. It would be good if it also supports Ubuntu, as we have tools running on both systems.
    Average Words per Review
    Average Words per Review
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
    Learn More
    Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper

    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.

    Learn more about OpenText UFT One
    Learn more about Ranorex Studio
    Sample Customers
    Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
    Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
    Top Industries
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Insurance Company8%
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Computer Software Company30%
    Manufacturing Company17%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Computer Software Company24%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Company Size
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise46%
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise60%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio
    September 2023
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: September 2023.
    734,024 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Mobile App Testing Tools with 21 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 4th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 9 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 7.8, while Ranorex Studio is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". 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 UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Worksoft Certify, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete, Selenium HQ and froglogic Squish. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio report.

    See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Mobile App 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.