Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Ranorex Studio vs Selenium HQ 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

Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.3%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.2%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Selenium HQ3.2%
Ranorex Studio3.3%
Other93.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Manager consultant - Digital assurance Services at adrosonic
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The solution is stable."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"Object identification is good."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"The product is quite stable."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"The stability and performance are good."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
 

Cons

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"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."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"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."
"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."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"The most significant issue with Selenium is its difficulty in adapting to changing locators, which can hinder testing."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
 

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)."
"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
"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."
"This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"Selenium HQ is open source and our use of it in our company is provided for free."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It is an open-source tool."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
880,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
 

Also Known As

No data available
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.