We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."Scripting with the solution is good."
"It's easy to set up."
"The ease of use is the solution's most valuable feature. Also, the ability to easily create test cases is also very good. It's easy to just ramp up on the solution."
"The reports and analysis tools are very good. They are the solution's most valuable features."
"Apache JMeter is quite flexible."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"The most valuable part of the product is the way you can scale the basic testing easily."
"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."
"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"Improving JMeter's sync time would be beneficial."
"We're like the solution to be more user-friendly."
"Self-healing and page rendering for the end-users are not available in Apache JMeter."
"They should improve the solution on its UI front."
"The only thing is the learning curve. It's high."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"Apache should have a graphic interface."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.