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."Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"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 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."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"The solution is quite stable."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"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 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."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"The solution is scalable."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
"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."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"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."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
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 Klocwork.
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.