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

Ranorex Studio vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (14th)
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.3%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Visual Studio Test Professional is 2.5%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Visual Studio Test Professional2.5%
Ranorex Studio3.3%
Other94.2%
Functional 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.
Payel Saha - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Integrated collaboration with automated test management has improved our agile workflows and continuously supports quality reporting
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio Code, we have an agent mode for GitHub Copilot, which is very helpful in testing or development phases, while Visual Studio's GitHub Copilot is a bit tricky and sometimes does not provide my desired output.For future improvements, I would like to see prompt fixing, as currently, if something goes wrong in Visual Studio, the fixing options are not always correct. If that intelligence is embedded, it would be very helpful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have automated 15+ internal applications for our client, which reduced much manual effort on regression testing."
"Dynamically changing application or a desktop application which is challenging to automate, blindly go for Ranorex."
"I’ve always found their support second to none, with responses to my questions answered promptly and technical staff who are extremely technical, which is refreshing given the generally basic support previously experienced from other vendors."
"With a small team of one onshore person and three offshore people, I was able to show the value of $90,000 savings for a project as a POC and the customer is currently using this tool for several other projects in their organization after seeing the ROI for one project."
"Ranorex is a very good product, especially for testing Windows Forms applications but also companies with web applications and mobile applications will be very pleased by the product as it has also perfect UI recognition for these platforms."
"We tried using HP QTP and Selenium, but opted for Ranorex because of its reasonable price and the ease of use of the automation tool."
"Based on my experience, this would be my tool of choice for test automation."
"Object identification is good, it is easy to identify and convenient for scripting as well, which is a good thing for us."
"Visual Studio Test Professional's most valuable feature is the rich IDE for doing code and test development."
"Its initial setup process is easy."
"The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective."
"We develop software for Windows, but also across platforms, using Visual Studio."
"We aren't bothered by the pricing of the solution at all due to the fact that it provides us with a lot of great tools."
"Visual Studio is a good solution that I would recommend."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"You can easily write code, test, and deploy within the same environment. It is a mature tool. It regularly receives new updates and versions. In my opinion, it's one of the best products by Microsoft for developers."
 

Cons

"Their logs are not compatible with the continuous integration we use internally."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a way to indicate the coverage of the tests of the application."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"I would like to see more integration in the solution."
"It could be available for multiple platforms and other operating systems like Mac with a native port."
"The data flow can be improved."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code."
 

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)."
"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."
"Users have to pay a licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional."
"We use the solution’s community version, and the solution’s pricing could be cheaper."
"I think that the pricing is quite good."
"The pricing is expensive."
"There are two versions of Visual Studio Test Professional: Community and Professional. We are currently using the Community version, but if we start working on a commercial product, we will consider upgrading to the Professional version. We need to identify how we will proceed with our projects, and based on that, we will decide on our licensing."
"It is a price-effective solution"
"I positioned it at a mid-range level. It isn't an inexpensive solution, but considering its capabilities, it represents excellent value for the functionalities it offers."
"We pay for the solution annually and the price could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Studio Test Professional?
The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective.
What needs improvement with Visual Studio Test Professional?
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio C...
What is your primary use case for Visual Studio Test Professional?
We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for automation testing, specifically using C# Selenium.Visual Studio Test Case Management, which is embedded in Azure DevOps itself, is part of our process. We ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Find out what your peers are saying about Ranorex Studio vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.