We performed a comparison between Cavisson NetStorm and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are the separate module for scripting, execution analysis, and integration with a lot of new things pipeline areas. They keep updating their releases. Recently, they have released different versions, such as the professional and enterprise. They're coming up with new features which are good."
"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 19th in Load Testing Tools while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 3rd in Load Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.4, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester. See our Cavisson NetStorm vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.