We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The most valuable feature has been to store all our packages in one place including SSIS packages, SQL tables, TFS and SSR."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"Easy to use and easily scalable."
"The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems."
"The interface is easy to use."
"Visual Studio is highly powerful. It's probably the best software development tool on the market."
"Visual Studio Test Pro is super helpful for my Microsoft app work."
"One of the best documentation in the world."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"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."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"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."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
"I would like to see more integration in the solution."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
"The server that we use is very slow so that is concerning for us."
"The product must provide more integration."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT Developer.
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.