We performed a comparison between Perforce QA Wizard Pro and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The most valuable feature is the option to pull changes from others or make local changes in your own change list."
"Object identification is good."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"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."
"It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
Earn 20 points
Perforce QA Wizard Pro is ranked 41st in Functional Testing Tools while Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. Perforce QA Wizard Pro is rated 5.0, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Perforce QA Wizard Pro writes "Shared change lists are helpful, but poor scalability leads to problems with instability". 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". Perforce QA Wizard Pro is most compared with , whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression 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.