We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"The user interface is fine."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"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."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 70 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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 SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
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.