Oracle Application Testing Suite vs Ranorex Studio comparison

Oracle and Ranorex are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Oracle is ranked #25, while Ranorex is ranked #19. Oracle holds a 1.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Ranorex’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Oracle users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

Oracle Application Testing ...

Read 24 Oracle Application Testing Suite reviews

1,377 Views
785 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

2,913 Views
1,748 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Oracle Application Testing ...

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Oracle Application Testing Suite and Ranorex Studio compete in the software testing automation category. Oracle has the upper hand for Oracle-specific projects, whereas Ranorex excels in cross-platform testing.

Features: Oracle Application Testing Suite provides a comprehensive package for automation, functional testing, performance testing, and load testing, especially effective within the Oracle ecosystem. Ranorex Studio offers strong support for cross-browser and cross-platform testing including mobile and desktop applications, Ranorex Spy, and robust code integration.

Room for Improvement: Oracle Application Testing Suite could enhance object identification, browser compatibility, and support for non-Oracle applications. Ranorex Studio could improve object recognition consistency, support additional operating systems like Mac and Linux, and enhance parallel execution capabilities and API documentation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Oracle Application Testing Suite can be deployed on-premises or as a hybrid cloud solution with strong support within the Oracle ecosystem. Users find Oracle’s technical support responsive but occasionally delayed. Ranorex Studio is mainly deployed on-premises or via public cloud, facing challenges due to its Windows-only support. Its customer service is generally well-regarded but less specialized than Oracle's.

Pricing and ROI: Oracle Application Testing Suite is seen as affordable, especially for Oracle customers, offering favorable ROI and flexible licensing. Ranorex Studio, while potentially more expensive, justifies its pricing with a robust feature set and multi-platform compatibility, offering node-locked and floating licenses.

To learn more, read our detailed Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 871,358 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Oracle Application Testing ...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

25th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (15th), Load Testing Tools (13th)

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (10th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (16th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.4%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.2%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Ranorex Studio	3.2%
Oracle Application Testing Suite	1.4%
Other	95.4%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Rishabh-Sharma

Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology

Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy

Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

Read full review

Aws V

IT Team Leader -Automation Manager at Citco

Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet

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. Additionally, expanding language support beyond C#, Java, and JavaScript to include Python would be beneficial. An AI feature that automatically detects automation object properties and suggests actions would be a great addition. So, in future releases, AI solutions for automated property identification would be helpful.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."

"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."

"The solution is scalable."

"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."

"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."

"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."

"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."

"The function test feature is valuable."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite pros

"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"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 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."

"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 solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."

"The solution is stable."

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."

"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."

"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."

"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."

"I have faced issues with some indexing items."

"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."

"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."

"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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 solution's technical support team could be responsive."

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

"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."

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."

"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."

"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."

"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)."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

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

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

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

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

19%

Computer Software Company

11%

Performing Arts

Retailer

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	23

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 14% of the time

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 10% of the time

Perfecto vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 9% of the time

Apache JMeter vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 9% of the time

More Oracle Application Testing Suite Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 22% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 13% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 12% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 9% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite

October 2025

Download Oracle Application Testing Suite product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

October 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Also Known As

OATS

No data available

Overview

Application Testing Suite is a comprehensive, integrated testing solution that ensures the quality, scalability, and availability of your Web applications, Web Services, packaged Oracle Applications and Oracle databases.

Oracle

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.

Ranorex

Sample Customers

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio

September 2025

Free Report: Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio 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.