We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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."The performance of the solution is excellent."
"We are using this for performance testing and some automation."
"Apache JMeter is stable."
"It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"User-friendly and open source."
"The product helps me get the expected performance from applications or servers and reduces costs. It also enhances the performance of the services and helped them reach their ultimate capacity."
"I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing."
"The distributed load testing is very good with Apache JMeter."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"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 most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"If JMeter could provide a web version of editing, that would be good."
"The solution needs more metrics for reporting."
"If JMeter could integrate with the EPM solution, it would be great. It could also be improved by offering more integrations for security. For example, most applications are secure with OpenID Connect protocols."
"Report generation needs to be improved. It is quite difficult to get to."
"In terms of setup, it could be nicer, to be honest. Sometimes, I get a little bit lost."
"The plug-ins make the reports heavy and they have to be run in non-GUI mode."
"The UI needs some work. The first time I used JMeter, I couldn't record the full scenario to mimic the user experience. Since then, they have introduced some plugins and a third-party tool called BlazeMeter."
"The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."
"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 only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". 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". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and ReadyAPI, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional 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.