We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
"Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration allows for quick comparison of monitoring and performance results, a feature I highly appreciate."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a user-friendly solution."
"One of the best documentation in the world."
"Its initial setup process is easy."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"Visual Studio is an exemplary integrated development environment that stands out due to its exceptional features. It allows for the seamless selection of the appropriate programming language for the specific development tasks at hand. This facilitates a swift and effortless transition between languages, providing a highly efficient development experience."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"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."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"The product must provide more integration."
"Its UI could be better."
"The tool crashes and has high memory consumption."
"The documentation is limited."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its scalability."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText UFT One, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT One.
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.
