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 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."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"The solution is scalable."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"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."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"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."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement."
"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"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."
"The performance could be a bit 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."
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.