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

Ranorex Studio vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
14th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (12th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.3%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.6%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Selenium HQ3.6%
Ranorex Studio3.3%
Other93.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Object identification is good."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"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."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"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 solution is stable."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"It is a good automation tool."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"Selenium is an open-source tool."
 

Cons

"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
"It would be better to have a simplified way to locate and identify web elements."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
"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."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"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."
"It is an open-source solution."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
"The pricing is open source."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business40
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

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.
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.
What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?
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 languag...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
 

Also Known As

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.