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

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL] vs Ranorex Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 8, 2025

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

Perforce QA Wizard Pro [EOL]
Average Rating
5.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ranorex Studio
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (18th), Mobile App Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Featured Reviews

AK
DevOps Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Shared change lists are helpful, but poor scalability leads to problems with instability
The biggest problems with this solution have to do with scale. If the load is high then your request is put on hold for a second, and then you have to handle it. If you make a lot of requests then it is your problem. It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time. Any additional request would be put on hold and made to wait for a few seconds. Once the network and infrastructure are loaded to handle the next request, it would proceed.
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.

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 is the option to pull changes from others or make local changes in your own change list."
"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."
"We tried several, and we chose Ranorex for its ability to cover large amounts of testing with minimal coding."
"In this particular area Ranorex proved to be a perfect choice."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of this solution are object recognition and the fact that you can memorize the objects."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"Overall, it's a good product."
"I implemented this tool for several of my customers and I can see the ROI right away."
 

Cons

"It would be very helpful if a queue was implemented to handle, for example, 100 requests at the same time."
"Generally, we can say that we have not had an excellent experience with Perforce."
"Tests will fail if browser minimised, Parallel Execution Not possible (We could do are some extend if we use DOM method)."
"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."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a way to indicate the coverage of the tests of the application."
"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."
"Their logs are not compatible with the continuous integration we use internally."
"They need to improve their support of different web browsers along with Flash support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
"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."
"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ubisoft, Expedia, Honda, Samsung,Citrix
Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.