We performed a comparison between Cavisson NetStorm and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"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."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"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."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 19th in Load Testing Tools while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 76 reviews. Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.4, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". 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". Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
See our list of best Load 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.