We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and ReadyAPI 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."The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"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."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 33 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and froglogic Squish. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Performance 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.