Ranorex Studio vs ReadyAPI comparison

Ranorex and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Ranorex is ranked #14 with an average rating of 7.5, while SmartBear is ranked #17 with an average rating of 7.5. Ranorex holds a 3.6% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Ranorex users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 86% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

2,112 Views
1,566 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI

Read 36 ReadyAPI reviews

1,302 Views
665 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

ReadyAPI

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Ranorex Studio and ReadyAPI are two prominent tools used for test automation. Ranorex Studio appears to have the upper hand in UI automation across technologies, while ReadyAPI excels in API testing with exceptional integration and Groovy scripting capabilities.

Features: Ranorex Studio offers integration of test scripts in C#, robust cross-browser support, and seamless test management for desktop, web, and mobile applications. ReadyAPI stands out with its comprehensive API testing suite, which includes smooth CI/CD workflows and Groovy scripting, as well as excellent integration options.

Room for Improvement: Ranorex Studio is limited by its Windows-only operation and object recognition inaccuracies. Enhancements in browser compatibility and modular functionality are suggested. ReadyAPI could improve by supporting diverse protocols and offering better version control in CI pipelines and test management tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Ranorex Studio offers straightforward on-premises deployment with responsive customer service, despite some geographical response time limitations. ReadyAPI, deployed similarly with some cloud capabilities, offers adequate customer service, though a boost in support responsiveness is suggested.

Pricing and ROI: Ranorex's flexible but higher pricing reflects its extensive feature set, impacting ROI through significant manual testing reductions. ReadyAPI, with moderate pricing tailored to API testing needs, supports efficient ROI, despite potential cost accumulation from extensive use.

To learn more, read our detailed Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 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

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

14th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (4th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (11th)

ReadyAPI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

17th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.6%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.2%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

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

SandeepSingh9

Sr. QA Engineer at Arizona Department of Education

Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper

One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration.

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

"Object identification is good."

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

"The solution is stable."

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

"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."

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

"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."

More Ranorex Studio pros

"Reporting is more robust than other products because test reports can be exported in multiple ways."

"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."

"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."

"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."

"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."

"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."

"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."

"When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."

Cons

"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."

"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."

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

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

"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."

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

"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."

More Ranorex Studio cons

"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."

"Can be improved by including an inherent feature for UI automation."

"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."

"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."

"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."

"The UI is not user-friendly."

"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."

"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."

"The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."

"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."

"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."

"We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."

"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."

"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."

"ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins."

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

15%

Insurance Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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

What do you like most about ReadyAPI?

The performance testing capabilities are very good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?

Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?

In native teams and cloud environments, there is room for improvement. I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor. These are more so points from my wishlis...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 24% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 16% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 8% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Apache JMeter vs ReadyAPI

Compared 43% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ReadyAPI

Compared 16% of the time

Katalon Studio vs ReadyAPI

Compared 14% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI

Compared 14% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs ReadyAPI

Compared 8% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

March 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI

March 2025

Download ReadyAPI product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ready API

Overview

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

ReadyAPI is an all-in-one automated testing platform that allows teams to create, manage, and execute automated functional, security, and performance tests in one centralized interface.

ReadyAPI Features

Some of ReadyAPI’s key features include:

Continuous integration
Comprehensive dashboard
API discovery
Central, standardized reporting function
Plugin architecture
ReadyAPI Projects
Multiple options for scripting to create functional, load, or security tests

ReadyAPI Benefits

Some of the benefits of using ReadyAPI include:

Easy and flexible test creation and execution: ReadyAPI has visual editors and wizards that make testing easy, saving time and simplifying onboarding.
Test APIs continuously: With ReadyAPI you can run consistent tests on local environments, Docker containers, or other distributed staging environments.
Team friendly: ReadyAPI enables software teams with the ability to easily share testing projects and artifacts, share licenses between team members, and report issues directly from the testing IDE.
Powerful, data-driven testing capabilities: With ReadyAPI, you can save time by checking for numerous real world conditions.
Supports multiple specifications, schemas, and protocols: ReadyAPI includes legacy SOAP services, microservices powered by Apache Kafka, and mainstream REST services, as well as IoT use cases leveraging MQTT. It allows you to test and virtualize the most popular API protocols and also to import APIs from specifications and schemas instantly.

Reviews from Real Users

Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by Dell EMC Unity users.

PeerSpot user Vallalarasu P., Test Architect at a tech services company, states, “ReadyAPI is one of the best tools for API testing because they have made a single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and also service actualization. We also have virtual work that can be an add-in within ReadyAPI. For integration for CACD, they have something called TestEngine, which can also be an add-on for ReadyAPI. We use Python request library and things like that but if you're a bigger organization with hundreds of APIs, then ReadyAPI is a one-stop solution for complete API testing. If you consider TestComplete and other products for an equivalent outcome, you might get something nearly comparable, butReadyAPI is the outstanding product.”

An IT Manager at an insurance company says the solution has “Fast automation, less coding, and is pretty lightweight. When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."

Balamurugan A., Manager at a financial services firm, comments, “We like the user interface. The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools.

They have interfaces with our performance tools, so we were able to leverage all of these integrations and plugins. It is very good from an integrative solution standpoint.”

SmartBear

Sample Customers

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

Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI

March 2025

Free Report: Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI

Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Ranorex Studio vs. ReadyAPI report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.