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 beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."
"The product is good, and the concept is good as well."
"The user interface is fine."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it."
"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"The product is stable for what we are currently using it for, and it is sufficient for us."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"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."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
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.
