We performed a comparison between Catchpoint and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Nexthink, Lakeside Software, ControlUp and others in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM)."Catchpoint is very flexible and also provides logs for troubleshooting purposes. It helps us fix issues within the SLAs signed with the end users. The tool is easy to learn."
"Catchpoint provides a great amount of information."
"The thing I like most is the tech support in this company, because they have 24/7 chat support. We can chat immediately and ask them about an issue and they keep responding. They create tickets on our behalf and respond."
"The solution offers three different ways of slicing data to look for abnormalities."
"Catchpoint's customer service and support are valuable."
"The best feature in Catchpoint is the alert or the notification my company gets frequently, in particular, every five minutes. It's the notification you get whenever a respective market has an issue. There's also a dashboard in Catchpoint that shows the markets you support, so all the markets will be highlighted graphically in the dashboard whenever there's downtime that could affect you. If there's no issue for a specific market, it will be in green, so in this way, anybody would be able to understand which market has issues and which market has no issues through Catchpoint. The tool is very useful for monitoring activities."
"The drill-down feature of this product was very good. It allowed us to identify the exact page or area of the site that was causing our customers an issue."
"We really need the API monitoring, as well as client side session monitoring, the global synthetic monitoring, to track the availability of the systems from the customer side."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"The ability to do multithreading. That's available in any performance testing tool, but the number of protocols that this particular tool supports has been very good."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"if we need to do performance analysis, we have to click too many times. For example, if there is an issue that is caught by Catchpoint, we need to understand what the error is and at which step it failed, or which transaction that is impacted. To drill down, we have to click too many things to get the answer."
"It would be great if Catchpoint could incorporate its alerting system instead of relying on separate tools like ServiceNow."
"We would like the script creation feature of this solution to be improved, as it currently requires a complicated manual process to update the scripts."
"Trending needs improvement. Currently, out-of-the-box, they provide only seven days availability. So, we have to do queries and we have to go into a separate analysis module, we have to run lot of queries to long-term trends."
"A large selection of nodes are available but it is a challenge to test reliably in China and the Middle East."
"The old user version was better, it was more user-friendly."
"There are essentially a lot of quotas. Nobody wants to sit and manually create monitors for someone who uses synthetic monitoring."
"There's still too much manual involvement in getting customized test configurations out there. It's good, but it still takes a lot of effort. In other words, it's when you need to configure it to collect a specific variable and that kind of thing."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."
"LoadRunner experiences high resource utilization. Even though we have machines with higher configurations, I've observed this behavior. Heavy traffic recording results in the tool hanging. So heavy traffic recording makes the tool slow."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Catchpoint is ranked 5th in Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) with 12 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Catchpoint is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Catchpoint writes "The UI is well designed, so it's easy to get the visibility you want". 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". Catchpoint is most compared with Dynatrace, ThousandEyes, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and AppDynamics, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
We monitor all Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) 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.