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 stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Technical support is helpful."
"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."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"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."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"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."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"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 performance could be a bit better."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"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."
"The summary reports could be improved."
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.