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."What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"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."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are the separate module for scripting, execution analysis, and integration with a lot of new things pipeline areas. They keep updating their releases. Recently, they have released different versions, such as the professional and enterprise. They're coming up with new features which are good."
"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."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"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."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"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."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"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."
"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"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 product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"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."
"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, 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.