We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."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 capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"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 reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Technical support is helpful."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"The solution is scalable."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 23rd in Functional Testing Tools with 30 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Tricentis Tosca.
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.