SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Ranorex

Other Test automation vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Ranorex. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 45 that differ from Ranorex on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Ranorex has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Ranorex” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at RanorexFound at Ranorex, not found there
PractiTestpractitest.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PractiTest 61/100 6 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact Compare
Cypresscypress.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Cypress 65/100 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Replicated Compatibility Matrixreplicated.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Replicated Compatibility Matrix 52/100 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 nothing Compare
Applitoolsapplitools.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Applitools 48/100 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Kobitonkobiton.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kobiton 43/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
Endtestendtest.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Endtest 48/100 3 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Katalonkatalon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Katalon 48/100 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named nothing Compare
ACCELQaccelq.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ACCELQ 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Data location stated Compare
Testsigmatestsigma.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Testsigma 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Data location stated Compare
Horizonthetestmart.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Horizon 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 2 Data location stated, Named privacy contact Compare
Allure TestOpsqameta.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Allure TestOps 30/100 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Data location stated Compare
Global App Testingglobalapptesting.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Global App Testing 39/100 2 Public pricing, Certifications named nothing Compare

Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.