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

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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
18th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
8th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (8th)
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
27th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.5%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.8%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio3.5%
Telerik Test Studio1.8%
Other94.7%
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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager Project Management at Capgemini
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

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 of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"We went with Ranorex due to its relative ease of use, and its support for automating desktop/WPF applications out of the box."
"Cross browser testing and the ability to perform mobile test automation mean you do not need to buy two different solutions for mobile and web channels separately."
"I tried to use different products Selenium, TestComplete, amongst others, but this was very familiar, fast, adaptable and flexible."
"Ranorex improved our ui automation by providing handy features such as WaitForExists, Exists, Enabled, Visible"
"Ranorex is a great tool to learn automation with pleasure."
"My advice for anybody who is considering Ranorex is that it is a powerful tool, it is far-reaching, and it works as advertised."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The object repository is the most valuable feature, as different elements can be identified and reutilized through the repository across other scripts, and the product has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
 

Cons

"Running the tool in a distributed environment was a challenge since Ranorex requires an active user session."
"While the product does well with its primary job of testing, when we are using Ranorex it would be nice if it would report directly in HTML."
"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."
"Any minor change to a repository can result in a version control system nightmare, making it more difficult when working in teams."
"SQL Connector has a lot of improvements to make, and they need to implement user-defined queries."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"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."
"There was one instance where I had an issue and contacted them for a solution; they were unable to provide it, and I ended up finding a workaround on my own."
"The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"We have not seen a return on investment yet."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
"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)."
"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."
"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.