Ranorex Studio vs TestingWhiz comparison

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."

"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 fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."

"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."

"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."

"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 automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."

"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"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)."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."