Compare Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ
Ranorex Studio is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.2. 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 "An open-source tool that's flexible and stable". Ranorex Studio is most compared with SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and UFT (QTP), whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Eggplant Functional and froglogic Squish. See our Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ report.
Most Helpful Review | |||
| |||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: November 2019. 383,725 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:
Pros | |
The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market. Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features. This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite. The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process. | 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 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 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 primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud. Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run. Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only. It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages. |
Cons | |
One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian. 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. 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. Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work. Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better). 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 does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing. The solution's UI path needs to be modernized. 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. It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background. In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues. Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%. It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
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. | This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it. |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs. 383,725 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 12,866 Comparisons 9,408 Reviews 4 Average Words per Review 527 Avg. Rating 8.0 | Views 16,706 Comparisons 13,569 Reviews 8 Average Words per Review 342 Avg. Rating 8.3 |
Top Comparisons | |
 Compared 24% of the time.  Compared 20% of the time.  Compared 13% of the time. |  Compared 10% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| SeleniumHQ | |
Learn | |
| Ranorex | SeleniumHQ Video Not Available |
Overview | |
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:
|
Offer | |
Learn more about Ranorex Studio | Learn more about Selenium HQ |
Sample Customers | |
| 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 |
Top Industries | |
Software R&D Company29% Financial Services Firm21% Manufacturing Company14% Comms Service Provider7% Software R&D Company34% Manufacturing Company11% Comms Service Provider10% Financial Services Firm9% | Financial Services Firm22% Retailer17% Manufacturing Company11% Software R&D Company11% Software R&D Company27% Financial Services Firm15% Comms Service Provider12% Manufacturing Company7% |
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
383,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also Ranorex Studio Reviews, Selenium HQ Reviews, and our list of Best Functional Testing Tools Companies.
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.
Sign in to see all reviews and comparisons. It's free!
By clicking Sign in with LinkedIn™ you agree to let IT Central Station use your LinkedIn profile
and email address in accordance with our Privacy Policy and agree to the Terms of Service.
- Unlimited access to 31000+ reviews from real users
- Your own page to promote your professional skills
- Join a community of experts to call upon for support
Already a member? Sign in.
By registering, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
- Unlimited access to 31000+ reviews from real users
- Your own page to promote your professional skills
- Join a community of experts to call upon for support
Already a member? Sign In.