We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and ReadyAPI Performance 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."The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the Vuser protocols."
"It is pretty easy to do test execution and results analysis. When it comes to scenario settings, LoadRunner Enterprise has an extra edge over other testing tools in the industry. The scenario setup is easy, and in terms of execution, we have a clear idea of what is happening"
"This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"We can scale."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"The solution is expensive."
"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews while ReadyAPI Performance is ranked 8th in Load Testing Tools with 7 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while ReadyAPI Performance is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI Performance writes "Straightforward to install with the ability to add multiple assertions but the price is too high". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas ReadyAPI Performance is most compared with SmartBear LoadNinja and Apache JMeter. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs. ReadyAPI Performance report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors and best Performance 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.