We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution is very user-friendly, and allows for a lot of data capture when testing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"The most valuable features of Apache JMeter are user-friendliness, large resource, and the quality of assistance they provide. Additionally, it is easy to integrate with cloud platforms, such as AWS."
"User-friendly and open source."
"JMeter is user-friendly, and that's a notable advantage of JVTech. It's straightforward and easy to use, unlike some other load testing tools, making it very easy to understand."
"To me, what's most valuable in Apache JMeter is that it's a lightweight tool for application testing. It's the best load-testing tool for my company because Apache JMeter simulates your application during testing. Apache JMeter also creates threads with good server utilization. Apache JMeter allows you to focus on analyzing the situation, looking into measurements, response time, and client-server responses, which I find valuable."
"We find the load testing feature valuable."
"The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"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."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Apache should have a graphic interface."
"Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues."
"It should be easier to combine multiple scripts. If you have multiple scripts, you need to write a new script to combine those scripts. The virtual user generator is slow."
"The solution's setup could be easier and security could be improved to minimize vulnerabilities."
"The tool should be made a bit more robust, and better support should be made available."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"The only thing is the learning curve. It's high."
"The reporting section of the solution can be better."
"The debugging capability should be improved."
"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"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 should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Load Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 76 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". 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". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and ReadyAPI, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, IBM Rational Performance Tester and BlazeMeter. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors and best Performance Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.