The concept of reproducibility has long been a cornerstone in scientific research, ensuring that results are robust, repeatable, and can be independently verified. This concept has been extended to computer science, focusing on the ability to recreate identical software artefacts. However, the importance of reproducibility in software engineering is often overlooked, leading to challenges in the validation, security, and reliability of software products. This master's thesis aims to investigate the current state of reproducibility in software engineering, exploring both the barriers and potential solutions to making software more reproducible and raising awareness. It identifies key factors that impede reproducibility such as inconsistent environments, lack of standardisation, and incomplete documentation. To tackle these issues, I propose an empirical comparison of tools facilitating software reproducibility. To provide a comprehensive assessment of reproducibility in software engineering, this study adopts a methodology that involves a hands-on evaluation of four different methods and tools. Through a systematic evaluation of these tools, this research seeks to determine their effectiveness in establishing and maintaining identical software environments and builds. This study contributes to academic knowledge and offers practical insights that could influence future software development protocols and standards.