Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs Ranorex Studio comparison

Digital.ai and Ranorex are both solutions in the Mobile App Testing Tools category. Digital.ai is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0, while Ranorex is ranked #4 with an average rating of 7.5. Digital.ai holds a 1.4% mindshare in MTT, compared to Ranorex’s 8.3% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Read 3 Digital.ai Continuous Testing reviews

212 Views
142 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

1,041 Views
777 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Ranorex Studio and Digital.ai Continuous Testing compete in enhancing software testing processes. Based on data comparisons, Ranorex Studio stands out for its pricing and support, while Digital.ai Continuous Testing is preferred for delivering superior features, despite its higher price.

Features: Ranorex Studio offers robust test automation, cross-platform testing, and ease of use for testers with different experience levels. Digital.ai Continuous Testing provides advanced integration, continuous delivery features, and extensive cloud-based testing environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Ranorex Studio has a straightforward installation process with reliable technical support, suitable for small to mid-sized projects. Digital.ai Continuous Testing involves a complex deployment for enterprise-level operations, backed by responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Ranorex Studio offers a more accessible pricing structure, appealing to small and medium-sized businesses by delivering significant ROI with its quick setup. Digital.ai Continuous Testing, although more expensive initially, offers long-term ROI through scalability and efficiency for large organizations.

To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,604 peers since 2012

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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

21st

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd)

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

4th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (14th), Regression Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 1.4%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 8.3%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Mobile App Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Alan Chiou

PM at Galaxy Software Services

Has Mobile Studio feature which can generate scripts

The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version.

Read full review

Aws V

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."

"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."

"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."

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

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"The solution is stable."

"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."

"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."

"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."

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

"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."

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."

"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."

"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."

"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."

"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."

"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."

"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."

"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."

"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."

"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."

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

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."

"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."

"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."

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

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

22%

Retailer

11%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

I'm using Digital.ai Continuous Testing to create and test a mobile application. We're developing and testing a mobile app.

See all answers

What do you like most about Ranorex Studio?

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ranorex Studio?

I'd rate it around five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, not too cheap but not overly pricey.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ranorex Studio?

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 50% of the time

Perfecto vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 27% of the time

LambdaTest vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 23% of the time

More Digital.ai Continuous Testing Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 24% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 7% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. Digital.ai Continuous Testing

April 2025

Download Digital.ai Continuous Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest

No data available

Overview

Experitest's continuous testing solutions enable enterprises to reduce risk and provide their customers satisfying, error-free experiences across all devices and browsers. They seamlessly integrate with best-in-class tools throughout the DevOps pipeline allowing organizations to rapidly deliver highly protected, quality applications at-speed and at-scale.

Digital.ai

Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

Ranorex

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio

April 2025

Free Report: Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Ranorex Studio report.

See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Mobile App Testing 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.