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

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 5, 2026

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
17th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (7th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 4.1%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 5.8%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.8%
Ranorex Studio4.1%
Other90.1%
Test Automation Tools
 

Q&A Highlights

Aug 24, 2016
 

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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Test Lead at Emerson
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I tried to use different products Selenium, TestComplete, amongst others, but this was very familiar, fast, adaptable and flexible."
"By using this product, we have been able to explore some more advanced strategies in developing our automation which has been able to carry over to other automation teams."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Since it is possible to reference the API from some other tools and solutions, instead of being forced to use Ranorex studio, we gained a lot on flexibility and re-using our existing tools and technologies in combination with Ranorex features which are relevant for our test automation process."
"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."
"Ranorex improved our ui automation by providing handy features such as WaitForExists, Exists, Enabled, Visible"
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"TestComplete fits almost almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications, making it an amazing feature for companies that want to automate UI tests on each application built in-house."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"If a company has an ecosystem and they need to automate the web, desktop, or mobile, then TestComplete is the right tool."
"You can record your actions and play them back later."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
 

Cons

"With the new version of Chrome, some objects are identified differently, so we need to identify those and fix the x-path of the object."
"They should have support for other OS’s, aside from only supporting Windows."
"I would like it to be more intuitive to use, especially in test management."
"It's usually any minor firewall change or anything changed in our security system that seems to throw me off for a few days where I have to troubleshoot it and figure out why it's not working."
"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."
"They need to improve their support of different web browsers along with Flash support."
"It's the biggest drawback of Ranorex that it's limited to one operating system."
"No real issues, but I had to force close Ranorex Studio a couple of times, as it was stuck with the 'Not Responding' message for a long time on Windows 7."
"Occasionally, image comparison results in failures, possibly due to issues with resolution or font size on the server side, which can be challenging to identify."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"More APIs could be added."
"The solution’s customer support should be improved."
"Often crashes with large projects. File check-in takes too much time in TFS."
"Some of the objects/parent objects are dynamically created in the web page. During the test, TestComplete will have problem to identify these kind of objects."
"I pay for support and maintenance; having used the “support” functions through online forums, I can say there is room for improvement."
"Sometimes the app crashes during test execution based on the amount of code that is running."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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)."
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"The price of SmartBear TestComplete could be less. The main challenge is when it comes to node-locked. They should use a subscription model, such as a monthly-based subscription or, a quarterly-based subscription. Their floating license is very expensive, and this high price should be reduced or provide, at a minimum, a subscription model."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,456 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

Aug 24, 2016
Aug 24, 2016
Thanks all, it's encouraging to see so much support and responses
2 out of 16 answers
it_user83412 - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Aug 23, 2016
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]
it_user457878 - PeerSpot reviewer
Works at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Aug 23, 2016
UFT will support or Tricentis TOSCA .
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

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 Business23
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature. Occasion...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete?
We are using SmartBear TestComplete ( /products/smartbear-testcomplete-reviews ) for automation over applications.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,456 professionals have used our research since 2012.