We performed a comparison between Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."
"Our main use case for the product was load and stress testing. It helped us put the system under stress by injecting in multiple users, such as 5,000 users."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is easy to use and has flexibility that allows it to be used on a variety of applications."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration allows for quick comparison of monitoring and performance results, a feature I highly appreciate."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"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."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
More Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is ranked 16th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is rated 9.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Dotcom-Monitor LoadView Stress Testing is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter.
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.
