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

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete Mobile comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 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

Ranorex Studio
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (17th), Regression Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (15th)
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 9.1%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete Mobile is 2.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ranorex Studio9.1%
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile2.4%
Other88.5%
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
AhmedAllalen - PeerSpot reviewer
Development team leader / APPR at a government with 501-1,000 employees
Clicking playback and detecting application needs improves functionality
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to understand why it's too detailed to detect or think of the browser. I use Chrome. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application. That's the problem. Also, when I run tests, I cannot export different types of logs in the same document. When I run different tests, it provides different logs, and these logs cannot be put in the same document. I have to compile them manually. Additionally, the tool can manage WinRamp scripts. I would say SilkTest also allows me to run tests, and I can challenge the sequencing, but it doesn't always do this correctly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"This is way better than QTP and Silktest when compared to in following aspects: User friendly UI, Cost of Tool, Continuous Integration, Instant release of updated add-on as per latest technologies and browsers, Full fledged trial product for exact 30 days."
"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."
"Support is very quick; you can write to them and on the same day they will respond, and this is one of the best features."
"Cross browser testing and the ability to perform mobile test automation mean you do not need to buy two different solutions for mobile and web channels separately."
"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."
"My advice for anybody who is considering Ranorex is that it is a powerful tool, it is far-reaching, and it works as advertised."
"I like that it offers internal methods for supported controls, it is very easy to code the tests, and Object Spy is also a good feature."
"The features I find most valuable is the automatic remapping of aliases, because it is really helpful."
"There are a lot of features in this tool, making it more complete with click and playback and proper things, and it is very effective for detecting breaks and also for verifying the needs of the application before deploying it or when introducing a new product."
 

Cons

"Tests will fail if browser minimised, Parallel Execution Not possible (We could do are some extend if we use DOM method)."
"The stability is in the range of eighty-five percent of what I was expecting. We still have some issues."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"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."
"They need to improve their support of different web browsers along with Flash support."
"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."
"Snapshots for WPF applications taking too long than expected."
"It needs a better connection to TFS."
"It is very difficult to use the aliases on old software, which hasn't been designed for us to test out."
"There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application."
"The mapping is pretty complicated because there are a lot of controls that are the same and if you have a long name with the object mapping it is easy to get confused."
"We have three test runs for 60 tests and the first time it's green, the second time one fails and so on. It is not consistent, but this problem occurs also because some of the controls are not fully supported by TestComplete."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
"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."
"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."
"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to un...
What is your primary use case for SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
The application is smaller than the transaction applications. It's a very delicate, complex application. Now I use it, however, it's just a test function for functional testing. I use TestComplete ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear TestComplete Mobile?
It's straightforward to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. SmartBear TestComplete Mobile and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.