No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL] vs Ranorex Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 8, 2025

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

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL]
Average Rating
5.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ranorex Studio
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (17th), Mobile App Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Featured Reviews

AK
DevOps Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Shared change lists are helpful, but poor scalability leads to problems with instability
The biggest problems with this solution have to do with scale. If the load is high then your request is put on hold for a second, and then you have to handle it. If you make a lot of requests then it is your problem. It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time. Any additional request would be put on hold and made to wait for a few seconds. Once the network and infrastructure are loaded to handle the next request, it would proceed.
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

"The most valuable feature is the option to pull changes from others or make local changes in your own change list."
"Ranorex improved our ui automation by providing handy features such as WaitForExists, Exists, Enabled, Visible"
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"In this particular area Ranorex proved to be a perfect choice."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"If you are looking for an automation tool that is easy to implement, easy to understand, and works with most of technologies on the market, Ranorex is the appropriate solution for you."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"It works well for us, we can quickly add service agents wherever we need to so we can run multiple scripts in parallel, and it runs pretty strongly while costing just a fraction of a UFT solution."
"Based on my experience, this would be my tool of choice for test automation."
 

Cons

"It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time."
"Generally, we can say that we have not had an excellent experience with Perforce."
"The current version of Ranorex Studio IDE is based on an old version of SharpDevelop IDE (3.2), but this is going to change soon (planned update to SharpDevelop 4.x)."
"While the product does well with its primary job of testing, when we are using Ranorex it would be nice if it would report directly in HTML."
"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."
"It needs a better connection to TFS."
"Tests will fail if browser minimised, Parallel Execution Not possible (We could do are some extend if we use DOM method)."
"It's the biggest drawback of Ranorex that it's limited to one operating system."
"SQL Connector has a lot of improvements to make, and they need to implement user-defined queries."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"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)."
"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.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ubisoft, Expedia, Honda, Samsung,Citrix
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 Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: June 2026.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.