We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"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."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 9th in Performance Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and RadView WebLOAD, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio and Tricentis NeoLoad. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance 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.