Compare Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ
Sponsored
 | Judy Zeman QA Manager at Carrier Global Corp. |
 | Anonymous User Consultant at a financial services firm |
| Anonymous User Senior Automation Engineer at a retailer |
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
511,773 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications."
"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"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 scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"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 initial setup is straightforward. Deployment took about seven months."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
Cons
"It would be great if our business testers could develop their own automated test cases. With every release you do, you have to go back and touch your old test cases and bring them up to speed, or develop new test cases. In the beginning, that is a challenge because you have to have someone who is certified in the tool to help you develop these test cases."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."
"Better automation capability would be helpful."
"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"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."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"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."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"There is a cost involved to doing it, but once you get over the initial cost, then you'll start reaping the benefits and seeing that testing is getting done more quickly and efficiently. We are still early on with it, but the expectation and what we're seeing is that we will start seeing some savings coming out on the back-end once we have this done."
"The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP."
"The initial investment is probably a little high. It was a little hard for me to sell, but it was a one-shot deal and that's why it's so high. All we are doing now is paying annual maintenance, which we don't have to do if we don't want upgrades, but we do."
"Purchasing and licensing are okay. Go for the perpetual licenses. In that way, you own a license, then you can purchase maintenance and support on top of that, so you don't have to pay every year for it. Even if you don't want it a contract with Worksoft Certify in the future, you will have your own license of it. Then, if your usage is not that much, you can have one or two perpetual licenses. However, if you want to run your processes, you will need more licenses, e.g., using the run-only licenses. They are really cheap compared to the full licensing."
"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)."
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
511,773 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the ability to automate quickly and to maintain and update scripts.
Top Answer: I haven't a bad opinion about the prices, however, when you pay a license is for a month or a year but in my experience… more »
Top Answer: We would like this to be able to be used outside of SAP applications, as it would be good for other types of products.
Top Answer: Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of… more »
Top Answer: The licensing fees depend on the number of users.
Top Answer: The object detection functionality needs to be improved. We have found that when you are selecting objects by moving the… more »
Top Answer: The solution is very easy to implement.
Top Answer: The solution is open-source and free to use. There are no licensing costs.
Top Answer: In the past, we had difficulty with screenshots, but this has been remedied. We feel that all the current solutions are… more »
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
SeleniumHQ
Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.
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.
Selenium HQ is a suite of tools to automate web browsers across many platforms. Selenium runs in many browsers and operating systems and can be controlled by many programming languages and testing frameworks. Selenium consist of two types:
- Selenium WebDriver - create robust, browser-based regression automation suites & tests and scale & distribute scripts across many environments.
- Selenium IDE - create quick bug reproduction scripts and create scripts to aid in automation-aided exploratory testing.
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
Learn more about Ranorex Studio
Learn more about Selenium HQ
Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines
Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Manufacturing Company28%
Consumer Goods Company13%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
Logistics Company8%
Computer Software Company31%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm9%
Manufacturing Company7%
Computer Software Company25%
Manufacturing Company19%
Financial Services Firm19%
Government6%
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider21%
Manufacturing Company6%
Media Company5%
Financial Services Firm27%
Computer Software Company19%
Retailer15%
Manufacturing Company8%
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm9%
Manufacturing Company7%
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise85%
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise70%
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise32%
Large Enterprise41%
Small Business25%
Midsize Enterprise29%
Large Enterprise46%
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
511,773 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranorex Studio is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 15 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Offers a strong suite of tools for application testing of mobile, desktop, and API apps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Gives a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do". Ranorex Studio is most compared with SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, froglogic Squish and Micro Focus UFT One, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence, Tricentis Tosca, Telerik Test Studio, froglogic Squish and Silk Test. See our Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional 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.