We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and OpenText UFT Digital Lab 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 fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The product is easy to use."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"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."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"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."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked 6th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 16 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is rated 7.4. 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 OpenText UFT Digital Lab writes "Robust solution for application lifecycle management with numerous valuable features". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText UFT Digital Lab is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Appium, Perfecto, AWS Device Farm and Sauce Labs. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab report.
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.
