We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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."The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It is actually a very good tool because it will support almost all, if not all, industry-standard protocols, and it is also equipped with very nice reporting capabilities, which is why I like it."
"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."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"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 stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"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."
"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."
"The capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Load Testing Tools with 39 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 76 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". 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". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter, Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and BlazeMeter. See our OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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.