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."I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"The solution is scalable."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it 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."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"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."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
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, Klocwork and Polyspace Code Prover.
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.