No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs Ranorex Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th), Load Testing Tools (14th)
Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio3.4%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.5%
Other95.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Aws V - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"OATS provides the functionality to institute a corporate-wide standardized method and approach for all types of application testing."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"Overall, Oracle Application Testing Suite is very easy to use and you can create a good framework for developing and testing."
"Helps us to reduce the workload to check the system."
"This product can facilitate the lowering of test execution times for operational people, as the bulk of the repeating test steps can be taken away by automating the EBS regression set in OpenScript every release."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"This is way better than QTP and Silktest when compared to in following aspects: User friendly UI, Cost of Tool, Continuous Integration, Instant release of updated add-on as per latest technologies and browsers, Full fledged trial product for exact 30 days."
"It is easy to install and use, the user interface is very good, and we moved onto this one as it provided an all-in-one solution for web, mobile, and multi-technology product testing where our previous tool failed."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"It is a good tool to perform user interface testing over a .NET product."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"With a small team of one onshore person and three offshore people, I was able to show the value of $90,000 savings for a project as a POC and the customer is currently using this tool for several other projects in their organization after seeing the ROI for one project."
"Dynamically changing application or a desktop application which is challenging to automate, blindly go for Ranorex."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
 

Cons

"I think that licensing policies could be more intuitive; when we installed this application for the first time, we couldn't understand why there were only two users."
"Improvements can be made in a number of protocol support areas, including enhanced Citrix support."
"OTM Test Report – We needed to develop custom reports as there is less flexibility."
"There are certain bugs which were present but was cleared in subsequent releases of application, but still there is room for improvement in the Functionality testing tool when automating form-based applications."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"There is one piece of functionality that is currently not offered and would be very good to have: Support for Digital Certificates authentication and Single Sign-On (SSO)."
"Tests will fail if browser minimised, Parallel Execution Not possible (We could do are some extend if we use DOM method)."
"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."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved. We have found that when you are selecting objects by moving the mouse, and then the position of these objects change in the newer versions of the application, the test tool fails to correctly identify them."
"Snapshots for WPF applications taking too long than expected."
"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available."
"I think it still needs to improve a lot."
"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."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"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)."
"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."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
895,272 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Also Known As

OATS
No data available
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: May 2026.
895,272 professionals have used our research since 2012.