OpenText UFT One vs Ranorex Studio comparison

OpenText and Ranorex are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.8, while Ranorex is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.5. OpenText holds a 9.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Ranorex’s 3.4% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Ranorex users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 96 OpenText UFT One reviews

6,480 Views
2,919 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Ranorex Studio

Read 46 Ranorex Studio reviews

1,952 Views
994 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Ranorex Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Ranorex Studio are both strong contenders in the automation testing market. While OpenText UFT One stands out for its comprehensive technology support, Ranorex Studio is favored for ease of use, particularly for desktop application testing.

Features: OpenText UFT One offers broad compatibility with various tools and technologies, supporting GUI testing, API testing, and enabling integration across multiple environments. It also includes advanced integration capabilities and strong object recognition features. Ranorex Studio is known for its user-friendly interface and supports testing across desktop, web, and mobile platforms. It provides robust cross-browser testing capabilities and a versatile object recognition system.

Room for Improvement: Users of UFT One have suggested the need for faster performance and enhanced browser compatibility. There's also room for refining its object recognition capabilities on newer platforms. Ranorex Studio users have mentioned the need for improvements in object recognition and additional operating system support such as macOS and Linux.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both OpenText UFT One and Ranorex Studio primarily offer on-premises deployment but are flexible with cloud options. UFT One users report varied experiences with technical support, whereas Ranorex Studio users typically find its support services satisfactory.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is often perceived as expensive, but its wide range of applicability often justifies the cost by enhancing productivity and minimizing manual testing times. Ranorex Studio, while also not inexpensive, provides considerable value with a flexible licensing model and an effective ROI through its powerful automation features.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 855,266 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

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (7th)

Ranorex Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

15th

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.4%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ranorex Studio is 3.4%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Q&A Highlights

it_user500790

Works

Aug 24, 2016

SAP GUI Testing Tool

Thanks all, it's encouraging to see so much support and responses

See all answers

Featured Reviews

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development

I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…

Read full review

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

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."

"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."

"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."

"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."

"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."

"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"Object identification is good."

"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."

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

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

"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 solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."

"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."

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

More Ranorex Studio pros

Cons

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."

"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."

"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."

"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."

"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."

"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

More OpenText UFT One cons

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

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

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

"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."

"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."

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"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."

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

More Ranorex Studio cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is high."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

"The price is reasonable."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"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."

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

"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)."

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

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

855,266 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Answers from the Community

it_user500790

Works

Aug 24, 2016

SAP GUI Testing Tool

Thanks all, it's encouraging to see so much support and responses

2 out of 16 answers

it_user83412

Vice President at Tricentis

Aug 23, 2016

All of these solutions are based on scripts and face the associated limitations. Test data management, parameterization, dynamic TBOMs, BPCA, SolMan integration and script maintenance all pose potential issues. I'd recommend looking at Tricentis Tosca or Worksoft, both of which provide scriptless automation for SAP GUI. Tosca also supports Fiori and NWBC natively as well as over 30 different UI and API technologies. [FULL DISCLOSURE: I work for Tricentis, so obviously biased, but we serve many SAP clients]

Read full answer

it_user457878

Works at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Aug 23, 2016

UFT will support or Tricentis TOSCA .

Read full answer

See all 16 answers

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?

We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?

My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...

See all answers

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

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 12% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 8% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 8% of the time

Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 23% of the time

Qt Squish vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 15% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 14% of the time

Selenium HQ vs Ranorex Studio

Compared 4% of the time

More Ranorex Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

May 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Download Ranorex Studio product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

No data available

Overview

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications.

Read white paper

OpenText

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

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

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

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio

May 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

855,266 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. Ranorex Studio report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Mobile App 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.