We performed a comparison between Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."
"The solution is very stable."
"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."
"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."
"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."
"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."
"The test clip should be more user-friendly."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai CloudTest is ranked 12th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Akamai CloudTest is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Akamai CloudTest writes "Is easy to use and quick to setup, and does not require much resource capacity for medium instances". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Akamai CloudTest is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Visual Studio Test Professional.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
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.
