ACCELQ Automate vs Ranorex Studio comparison

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"Object identification is good."

"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."

"The solution is stable."

"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration 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."

"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 solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"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."

"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."

"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."

"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."

"When Ranorex is upgraded, the compatibility with other projects, in version control, in-house or on-premise, fails on occasion. However, overall, the stability is good."

"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."

"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 rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."

"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."

"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)."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."