We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The solution is stable."
"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 scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The product has many features."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 7th in Regression Testing Tools with 46 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 6th in Regression Testing Tools with 70 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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 SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, froglogic Squish, OpenText UFT One and Selenium HQ, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, froglogic Squish and Eggplant Test. See our Ranorex Studio vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.
All of these solutions are based on scripts and face the associated limitations. Test data management, parameterization, dynamic TBOMs, BPCA, SolMan integration and script maintenance all pose potential issues. I'd recommend looking at Tricentis Tosca or Worksoft, both of which provide scriptless automation for SAP GUI. Tosca also supports Fiori and NWBC natively as well as over 30 different UI and API technologies.
[FULL DISCLOSURE: I work for Tricentis, so obviously biased, but we serve many SAP clients]
Have used HPE UFT and SAP TAO for testing SAP applications. SAP TAO is more oriented towards the use of SAP by the Technical Users, while you can structure your tests in HPE UFT to be more business oriented and UX-driven. The limitations for these tools are as have been iterated above the use of the Scripting Language and more times the use of 'Record and Play' methods to automate the tests.
As mentioned above integration with HP ALM (and BPT) makes the whole process easier to comprehend and work on from a Business viewpoint, and when your end users are basically Business users with limited Technical use. That said, you can try the latest SAP testing with the TOSCA tool also, which now provides the majority of the SAP 'modules' (aka objects) out of the box. This is a scriptless tool and with v9.x has the ability to do record and play and actual 'Exploratory' testing wherein the user can just switch it ON and record and later these steps are translated back into Test Case steps (much like TAO).
TestComplete is also good, but you need C# knowledge for most of the scripting work, otherwise it is a cheaper option to any of the other tools available. Again, you need to be mindful that someone needs to create the initial framework and then users can work on it. This tool is more helpful when doing some Unit Tests.
I am not sure of Ranorex, as have not used it.
It's been a while since I have used SmartBear, but I do know with HP & Ranorex that you will need to have more a development background for both your test logic and object recognition. If your testers are more developers, then you'll be ok. Will be happy to share other options to look at.
Please checkout the following links for HP solutions:
resultspositive.com
www8.hp.com
www.techvalidate.com
Thanks,
-PL
Hi,
I tested SAP with HPE UFT including BPT with a high level of success. The major difference between TAO and UFT is that UFT approaches testing from a user/business perspective while TAO is more oriented towards technical part by accessing individually each transaction. We were in System and later Acceptance Test so UFT was the tool of choice. HPE UFT detected objects ok, we could access all transactions and compose whatever scenarios crossed our minds. In order to do that we integrated with HP ALM who offered BPT which made the work a lot easier. We knew the tool so no training was necessary but the cost of licenses was quiet high.
Hope it helps
Victor
UFT will support or Tricentis TOSCA .