We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"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."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"The solution is scalable."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons."
"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."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 9th in Performance Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance 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.
