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."LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"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."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The solution is scalable."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"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 reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"The debugging capability should be improved."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"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."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
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.