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

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete Mobile comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 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

Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (17th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (15th)
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 9.1%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete Mobile is 2.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio9.1%
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile2.4%
Other88.5%
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
AhmedAllalen - PeerSpot reviewer
Development team leader / APPR at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Clicking playback and detecting application needs improves functionality
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to understand why it's too detailed to detect or think of the browser. I use Chrome. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application. That's the problem. Also, when I run tests, I cannot export different types of logs in the same document. When I run different tests, it provides different logs, and these logs cannot be put in the same document. I have to compile them manually. Additionally, the tool can manage WinRamp scripts. I would say SilkTest also allows me to run tests, and I can challenge the sequencing, but it doesn't always do this correctly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ranorex improved our ui automation by providing handy features such as WaitForExists, Exists, Enabled, Visible"
"With a small team of one onshore person and three offshore people, I was able to show the value of $90,000 savings for a project as a POC and the customer is currently using this tool for several other projects in their organization after seeing the ROI for one project."
"It's easy to use the test suite and add test cases to do our product bug fixes, and software pre-release regression tests, and continuous Integration testing with Jenkins CI tool for each software build test."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"It's improved our company in a numbers of ways, but most importantly it helps us save time and the report preparation is nice and easy."
"By our calculations we are now getting a return of 50% time saved in team efforts, making the team 50% more productive."
"Not only is Ranorex's solution one of the most powerful and easy to use, it has one of the lowest cost entry points resulting in a quicker ROI."
"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."
"The features I find most valuable is the automatic remapping of aliases, because it is really helpful."
"I like that it offers internal methods for supported controls, it is very easy to code the tests, and Object Spy is also a good feature."
"There are a lot of features in this tool, making it more complete with click and playback and proper things, and it is very effective for detecting breaks and also for verifying the needs of the application before deploying it or when introducing a new product."
 

Cons

"I have proposed few suggestions to them in the product improvement area."
"More possibilities on mobile devices, as we have already encountered some problems with iFrames integrated in a web page."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"The solution has good quality and functionality but I would not recommend it because of its unfamiliarity in the market."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved. We have found that when you are selecting objects by moving the mouse, and then the position of these objects change in the newer versions of the application, the test tool fails to correctly identify them."
"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."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"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."
"We have three test runs for 60 tests and the first time it's green, the second time one fails and so on. It is not consistent, but this problem occurs also because some of the controls are not fully supported by TestComplete."
"The mapping is pretty complicated because there are a lot of controls that are the same and if you have a long name with the object mapping it is easy to get confused."
"It is very difficult to use the aliases on old software, which hasn't been designed for us to test out."
"There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application."
 

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."
"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)."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to un...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
The application is smaller than the transaction applications. It's a very delicate, complex application. Now I use it, however, it's just a test function for functional testing. I use TestComplete ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
It's straightforward to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. SmartBear TestComplete Mobile and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.