We performed a comparison between Ranorex Studio and UiPath Test Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"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."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"It is a very scalable product."
"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."
"In terms of integration with other lifecycle tools and applications, UiPath Test Suite works very well because of the basis of RPA, and how RPA and automation can handle different applications and different areas of expertise."
"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."
"UiPath's tools are generally designed for business users, so they can be as simple or as complex as needed."
"The detailed logging is invaluable."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
"It's useful for automating tasks."
"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"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."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"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."
"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."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"The product releases sometimes have issues."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"They could improve the visualization of the product."
"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."
"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
Ranorex Studio is ranked 9th in Test Automation Tools with 46 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Testim, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Telerik Test Studio. See our Ranorex Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.