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."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"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 think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"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."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"The debugging capability should be improved."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"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."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
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.