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."Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"It is actually a very good tool because it will support almost all, if not all, industry-standard protocols, and it is also equipped with very nice reporting capabilities, which is why I like it."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The solution is scalable."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"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."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"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."
"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"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."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"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."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"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 77 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 24th 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.