ACCELQ Automate vs Ranorex Studio comparison

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

"The solution is stable."

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."

"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'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."

"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

"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 platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"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."

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"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."

"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."

"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."

"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."

"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."

"I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."

"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."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."

"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)."