We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"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."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"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."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"The most valuable feature is being able to run each version for test suites."
"It's easy to automate for more data-driven testing."
"This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"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 object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"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."
"If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it."
"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."
"Version control does not work well."
"There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated."
"To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it was just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
