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 number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"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."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"The ability to do multithreading. That's available in any performance testing tool, but the number of protocols that this particular tool supports has been very good."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Technical support is helpful."
"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."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"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 solution lacks some form of integration."
"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."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"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."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
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.