We performed a comparison between Katalon Studio and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has been good so far for API testing on Mac. It is not that hard to learn and use. There is so much support out there, so if anyone wants to start using it, there is enough help."
"Katalon Studio's biggest advantage is its price. It's a good tool for the price, albeit with some limitations when you compare it with tools like Tricentis Tosca."
"The recording feature of this product is very valuable for our testing purposes."
"One of the features that I like is Object Recognition. It worked very well, and it allowed me to create a dynamic expert based on my requirements."
"Video capture on failure is a must have. A picture is worth a thousand words. A video is worth a thousand pictures (literally)."
"We are now performing automated testing in 15 minutes, which were previously taking a long time when doing it manually."
"This is a product that is well ahead of its immediate competition in features and functionality."
"I personally like the 'Object Spy' feature of this tool. It makes it easy to find an element on the web page."
"Object identification is good."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"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."
"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."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"I can say that in my company, we struggle a lot with iOS automation."
"It seems to lack a few requirements that a typical customer would want. Compared to other solutions, this product is lacking."
"There is not much support offered for the free version, which is something that could be improved."
"Katalon lacks integration with other software, including integrating other languages like .NET and PHP."
"Katalon doesn't support testing of hybrid applications. It's a limitation."
"The price of the solution is a bit high. It's one of the reasons we decided not to continue using the product."
"What it lacks is the Selenium Grid capabilities."
"The product is comparatively slow."
"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."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"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."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"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."
Katalon Studio is ranked 3rd in Regression Testing Tools with 41 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 7th in Regression Testing Tools with 46 reviews. Katalon Studio is rated 7.8, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Katalon Studio writes "Useful multiple technology platform, scalable, but usability could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". Katalon Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Postman, OpenText UFT One, Testim and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish, OpenText UFT One and Selenium HQ. See our Katalon Studio vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.