Ranorex Studio vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

Ranorex and Tricentis are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Ranorex is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.5, while Tricentis is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. Ranorex holds a 3.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Tricentis’s 19.7% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Ranorex users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

1,952 Views
994 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Tricentis Tosca

Read 110 Tricentis Tosca reviews

13,710 Views
4,387 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Tricentis Tosca

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Tricentis Tosca and Ranorex Studio are competitors in the test automation software category. Tricentis Tosca holds an advantage due to its scriptless automation and scalability, making it ideal for non-technical users in large enterprises.

Features: Tricentis Tosca facilitates model-based testing, allowing scriptless automation through a drag-and-drop interface. Its model-based approach supports multiple technologies like SAP and Salesforce, focusing on scalability and analytical engines for BI testing. In contrast, Ranorex Studio appeals to developers with its emphasis on custom scripting in C# and domain-specific languages. It offers a comprehensive IDE integrated with Visual Studio and strong UI object identification capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Tricentis Tosca could improve its compatibility with newer web applications and enhance test management options. Better version control and support for parallel execution are also needed. Ranorex Studio, on the other hand, lacks cross-platform support, being Windows-centric. Enhanced mobile capabilities and reduced dependency on Microsoft frameworks are areas for improvement. Both tools could enhance object recognition capabilities and their integration with third-party tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tricentis Tosca offers flexible deployment options, including on-premises, public, and hybrid cloud, suitable for larger enterprises. While it has strong customer service, there is room to improve its community support. Ranorex Studio focuses on on-premises deployment with simple setups for smaller teams. Its customer service is known for quick resolutions but could benefit from a stronger online community.

Pricing and ROI: Tricentis Tosca’s pricing targets enterprises with extensive automation needs, offering adjustable licenses but deterring smaller companies due to complexity and cost. Its ROI is significant in complete automation benefits. Ranorex Studio is also considered expensive but provides more affordable licensing options beneficial for smaller teams, with ROI primarily in testing efficiency and reduced development time through customizable scripting.

To learn more, read our detailed Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,874 peers since 2012

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

15th

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis Tosca

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

1st

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

110

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 19.7%, up from 17.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Aws V

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.

Read full review

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features

The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

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

"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."

"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 solution is stable."

"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 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."

"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."

"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."

More Ranorex Studio pros

"It's been very helpful to have connectivity with mobile. The tool also identifies some of the actual changes from the recordings on the actual testing suite. That is something that I really like."

"Very user-friendly and the low code automation is really helpful."

"With one click, it will scan all the elements on the screen, so that the user can select the required elements for automation tests."

"As a codeless automation tool, the product offers a user-friendly experience without requiring extensive coding knowledge. Users can easily handle various applications, including web applications, SAP applications, Windows applications, and even Salesforce applications, without manual coding."

"I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have enterprise-level customers."

"This solution is easy to use for everybody, including those who are not IT-educated."

"I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten as I am satisfied with it."

"I face no challenges or stability issues."

More Tricentis Tosca pros

Cons

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

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

"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."

"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."

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."

"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."

"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."

More Ranorex Studio cons

"Technical support used to be better. It is now a bit difficult to reach out compared to previous experiences."

"The product's test case management functionality needs enhancement."

"You need to spend much more time learning the tool and how to use it, compared to others."

"In terms of areas for improvement, Tricentis has a variety of tools, even its test management tool called qTest. Tricentis Tosca does have integration with different Tricentis tools, but the integration is geared towards a larger organization perspective. For very small organizations that have minimal licenses, the integration needs to be improvised. For example, I belong to a smaller organization that has only one license, so the capability that the tool provides for integration isn't sufficient because my company needs to have separate workspaces. When Tricentis Tosca is going to be running, it is going to use that license, but my company wants another separate workspace to record, relay, and test. This is what my team has been struggling with, and the mechanism is probably there, but that needs more time and investigation, so I can't say that I'm one hundred percent certain that Tricentis Tosca, in terms of integration for a smaller organization is insufficient. Another area for improvement is that Tricentis Tosca is currently just a Windows-based tool which affects the market because nowadays, Windows isn't the only operating system, for example, there's also Apple or IOS that's moving much faster than Windows."

"One thing to improve in Tricentis Tosca is that it's not compatible with Excel based forms. Another area for improvement is that the tool is not compatible with OpenText applications. The support and licensing cost for it also need improvement. The tool also needs cloud support, as it's currently on-premises only."

"It would be of great help if they can fix the loading or performance issues. Sometimes, when I create the test case folder and test cases, it feels like it has loading or performance issues. When passing the objects, we can't sometimes find the exact element. We need to find out that exact location and just give the path for that, and then it works. In the pipeline, when creating Jenkins, we create the list execution for passing the execution list to the commander. I feel it is a bit late, by a fraction of seconds. I first thought it could be my mistake or a setting issue, but I worked on that, and it's not a mistake or a setting issue."

"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."

"The tool lags in client-based applications. We have also encountered issues with the features in integrations."

More Tricentis Tosca cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

"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)."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"I am satisfied with the cost."

"I rate the price of Tricentis Tosca a two out of five."

"I give the cost of Tricentis Tosca a six out of seven."

"I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it."

"The tool is expensive. It has become overpriced, especially after Tricentis Tosca grew as a company. Initially, we bought a license with an annual support fee, which wasn't too expensive. However, they changed the model, and now we have to purchase a license yearly, which has become quite costly."

"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."

"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is on the higher side."

More Tricentis Tosca pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

856,874 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?

See all answers

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?

We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...

See all answers

How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?

Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...

See all answers

What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?

For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 7% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Worksoft Certify vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 10% of the time

Testim vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 8% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs Tricentis Tosca

Compared 3% of the time

More Tricentis Tosca Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis Tosca

May 2025

Download Tricentis Tosca product report

Overview

Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

Ranorex

Tricentis Tosca is primarily leveraged for test automation across web, SAP, API, and mainframe applications, offering robust support for both regression and functional testing.

Tricentis Tosca's test automation capabilities extend to front-end and back-end testing, including processes like RPA and UI-based regression tests on Microsoft Windows. It supports Agile environments with multiple applications, enabling Salesforce automation, API endpoints, and end-to-end automation workflows. Tosca caters to diverse testing needs, integrating well with tools like Jenkins and Bamboo, although upgrades and customizations present challenges. Licensing costs and performance issues during loading and scanning are concerns, along with substantial learning curves for new users. Enhanced AI features and better reporting are on users' wishlist.

What are the key features of Tricentis Tosca?

Tosca BI: Ensures data integrity and accuracy in business intelligence testing
Tosca Commander: Centralized control for easy test management and maintenance
Model-Based Test Automation: Facilitates test creation without scripting
Integration Capabilities: Works seamlessly with Jenkins and Bamboo for CI/CD
Diverse Application Support: Compatible with mobile, web, APIs, and SAP
Scriptless Nature: Simplifies usage and reduces maintenance efforts

What benefits should users consider?

Enhanced Automation: Streamlines testing processes, saving time and resources
Scalability: Adapts to growing demands within an organization
Test Management: Centralized control enhances efficiency and oversight
Ease of Use: Scriptless approach lowers the barrier to entry for users

Tricentis Tosca is implemented across various industries, serving sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail with test automation solutions to ensure application quality and reliability. Agile teams in these industries benefit from its multi-application support and ability to manage complex end-to-end testing workflows. The tool's integration capabilities are particularly useful in environments that rely on CI/CD pipelines, ensuring continuous testing and quick feedback loops.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

May 2025

Free Report: Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca

Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,874 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Ranorex Studio vs. Tricentis Tosca report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Mobile App 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.