We performed a comparison between Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing 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."The pricing is reasonable."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"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 load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"A lot of time you start the stress testing, and you sign the log in again, and I want to get rid of that. It's just not clear to me how to do it yet."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"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."
More Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is ranked 16th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 76 reviews. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing writes "User-friendly, cheap, and quick to set up". 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". Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing 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.