We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"Defect management is very good."
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"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."
"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."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"Its variety of testing tools for different applications is of great benefit, as well as its integration capabilities with other testing and monitoring solutions."
"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."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."
"We would like to have support for agile development."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"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."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.