Ranorex Studio vs TestComplete

Overview

TestComplete

Stacks39

Followers60

Votes0

Ranorex Studio

Stacks13

Followers13

Votes0

Ranorex Studio vs TestComplete: What are the differences?

1. Installation and Setup: The key difference between Ranorex Studio and TestComplete lies in their installation and setup processes. Ranorex Studio provides a straightforward installation process, with a single installer that includes all necessary components. On the other hand, TestComplete requires separate installations for different components, making the setup process more complex.
2. Scripting Languages: Another significant difference is the scripting languages supported by both tools. Ranorex Studio primarily uses C# as its scripting language, while TestComplete supports multiple scripting languages such as VBScript, JScript, and JavaScript. This difference gives users more flexibility in choosing their preferred scripting language based on their comfort and expertise.
3. Object Recognition and Identification: Ranorex Studio and TestComplete differ in their approaches to object recognition and identification. Ranorex Studio utilizes a unique object-based recognition approach, which allows testers to identify objects based on their properties, making it easier to create robust automation scripts. In contrast, TestComplete uses a hierarchical approach, where objects are identified based on their position within the object hierarchy.
4. Test Execution: When it comes to executing tests, Ranorex Studio and TestComplete also have notable differences. Ranorex Studio offers various options for test execution, including local execution, remote execution on physical or virtual machines, and execution on cloud platforms. TestComplete, on the other hand, primarily focuses on local execution and does not provide as many options for remote or cloud-based execution.
5. Reporting and Analyzing Test Results: The way Ranorex Studio and TestComplete handle reporting and analyzing test results is also different. Ranorex Studio provides comprehensive reporting features, including detailed logs, screenshots, and failure reports, enabling testers to analyze test results more effectively. TestComplete also offers reporting capabilities but may not provide the same level of detail or flexibility as Ranorex Studio.
6. Pricing and Licensing: The pricing and licensing models of Ranorex Studio and TestComplete differ as well. Ranorex Studio follows a commercial licensing model, where users need to purchase a license based on the number of concurrent users. TestComplete, on the other hand, offers both commercial and community editions. The community edition of TestComplete is available for free, making it a more budget-friendly option for individual testers or small teams.

In summary, the key differences between Ranorex Studio and TestComplete include their installation and setup processes, supported scripting languages, approaches to object recognition, test execution options, reporting and analyzing test results, and pricing and licensing models. Each tool has its own strengths and considerations, and choosing the right tool depends on the specific requirements and preferences of the testing team.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

TestComplete	Ranorex Studio
It is an automated UI testing tool that makes it fast and easy to create, maintain, and execute functional tests across desktop, web, and mobile applications. With TestComplete, you can increase test coverage and ensure you ship high-quality, battle-tested software	It empowers testers with a complete toolset for end-to-end testing of desktop, web and mobile applications in a single license. Automate tests on a Windows desktop, and then execute them locally or remotely, on real iOS or Android mobile devices or on simulators/emulators.
Building Automated UI Tests; Object Recognition Engine now with Artificial Intelligence; HTML5 Test Automation; Data-Driven Testing; Automated Test Reporting & Analysis	Reliable object identification; Broad technology support; Easily maintainable repository; Easy for beginners, powerful for experts
Statistics
Stacks 39	Stacks 13
Followers 60	Followers 13
Votes 0	Votes 0
Integrations
Jenkins Git Visual Studio Jira Bugzilla	Jira Jenkins Firefox Google Chrome Safari Microsoft Edge

What are some alternatives to TestComplete, Ranorex Studio?

BrowserStack

BrowserStack is the leading test platform built for developers & QAs to expand test coverage, scale & optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability.

Selenium

Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well.

Sauce Labs

Cloud-based automated testing platform enables developers and QEs to perform functional, JavaScript unit, and manual tests with Selenium or Appium on web and mobile apps. Videos and screenshots for easy debugging. Secure and CI-ready.

LambdaTest

LambdaTest platform provides secure, scalable and insightful test orchestration for website, and mobile app testing. Customers at different points in their DevOps lifecycle can leverage Automation and/or Manual testing on LambdaTest.

Karma

Karma is not a testing framework, nor an assertion library. Karma just launches a HTTP server, and generates the test runner HTML file you probably already know from your favourite testing framework. So for testing purposes you can use pretty much anything you like.

Robot Framework

It is a generic test automation framework for acceptance testing and acceptance test-driven development. It has easy-to-use tabular test data syntax and it utilizes the keyword-driven testing approach. Its testing capabilities can be extended by test libraries implemented either with Python or Java, and users can create new higher-level keywords from existing ones using the same syntax that is used for creating test cases.

Karate DSL

Combines API test-automation, mocks and performance-testing into a single, unified framework. The BDD syntax popularized by Cucumber is language-neutral, and easy for even non-programmers. Besides powerful JSON & XML assertions, you can run tests in parallel for speed - which is critical for HTTP API testing.

Playwright

It is a Node library to automate the Chromium, WebKit and Firefox browsers with a single API. It enables cross-browser web automation that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast.

Rainforest QA

Rainforest gives you the reliability of a QA team and the speed of automation, without the hassle of managing a team or the pain of writing automated tests.

WebdriverIO

WebdriverIO lets you control a browser or a mobile application with just a few lines of code. Your test code will look simple, concise and easy to read.

Related Comparisons

Ranorex Studio vs TestComplete: What are the differences?

1. Installation and Setup: The key difference between Ranorex Studio and TestComplete lies in their installation and setup processes. Ranorex Studio provides a straightforward installation process, with a single installer that includes all necessary components. On the other hand, TestComplete requires separate installations for different components, making the setup process more complex.
2. Scripting Languages: Another significant difference is the scripting languages supported by both tools. Ranorex Studio primarily uses C# as its scripting language, while TestComplete supports multiple scripting languages such as VBScript, JScript, and JavaScript. This difference gives users more flexibility in choosing their preferred scripting language based on their comfort and expertise.
3. Object Recognition and Identification: Ranorex Studio and TestComplete differ in their approaches to object recognition and identification. Ranorex Studio utilizes a unique object-based recognition approach, which allows testers to identify objects based on their properties, making it easier to create robust automation scripts. In contrast, TestComplete uses a hierarchical approach, where objects are identified based on their position within the object hierarchy.
4. Test Execution: When it comes to executing tests, Ranorex Studio and TestComplete also have notable differences. Ranorex Studio offers various options for test execution, including local execution, remote execution on physical or virtual machines, and execution on cloud platforms. TestComplete, on the other hand, primarily focuses on local execution and does not provide as many options for remote or cloud-based execution.
5. Reporting and Analyzing Test Results: The way Ranorex Studio and TestComplete handle reporting and analyzing test results is also different. Ranorex Studio provides comprehensive reporting features, including detailed logs, screenshots, and failure reports, enabling testers to analyze test results more effectively. TestComplete also offers reporting capabilities but may not provide the same level of detail or flexibility as Ranorex Studio.
6. Pricing and Licensing: The pricing and licensing models of Ranorex Studio and TestComplete differ as well. Ranorex Studio follows a commercial licensing model, where users need to purchase a license based on the number of concurrent users. TestComplete, on the other hand, offers both commercial and community editions. The community edition of TestComplete is available for free, making it a more budget-friendly option for individual testers or small teams.

Ranorex Studio vs TestComplete

Overview