We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"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."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"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 solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git."
"This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"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."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 33 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and IBM Rational Functional Tester, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI 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.
