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."Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"Object identification is good."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"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."
"The solution is stable."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"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 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 most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"Reporting is more robust than other products because test reports can be exported in multiple ways."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"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."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
"Version control does not work well."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"ReadyAPI could improve by adding a conversion tool from one file type to another. Import support for multiple file types would be beneficial."
"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."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th 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.
