Akamai CloudTest vs OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Akamai Logo
705 views|482 comparisons
83% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
4,253 views|2,499 comparisons
90% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Report (Updated: May 2024).
769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible.""The solution is very stable.""From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.""This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."

More Akamai CloudTest Pros →

"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good.""We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution.""It is pretty easy to do test execution and results analysis. When it comes to scenario settings, LoadRunner Enterprise has an extra edge over other testing tools in the industry. The scenario setup is easy, and in terms of execution, we have a clear idea of what is happening""One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this.""Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly.""The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains.""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.""Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools."

More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pros →

Cons
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy.""Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release.""The test clip should be more user-friendly.""In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."

More Akamai CloudTest Cons →

"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc.""Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors.""Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled.""On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on.""While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product.""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.""I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering.""LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."

More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Running cost is very low."
  • "We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."
  • More Akamai CloudTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
  • "It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
  • "It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
  • "ROI is 200%."
  • "It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
  • "The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
  • "They have a much more practical pricing model now."
  • "I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
  • More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise… more »
    Top Answer:In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling… more »
    Top Answer:We use this solution mostly for generating loads for a couple of our retail clients, especially for holiday readiness. We want to get our system up and running to get ready for unpredicted loads. So… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:In South Africa, for a load license with about 5,000 concurrent users, the annual license, not including patches, is around 1.5 million to 2 million, depending on the currency exchange. That's a lot… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Ranking
    12th
    Views
    705
    Comparisons
    482
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    745
    Rating
    8.0
    Views
    4,253
    Comparisons
    2,499
    Reviews
    27
    Average Words per Review
    730
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    SOASTA CloudTest
    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
    Learn More
    Overview

    Soasta's CloudTest rapidly builds realistic test scenarios using real user data, then tests, analyzes and repairs faster. CloudTest's visual test environment and real-time analytics test your website, mobile app and api backend to give you a streaming view of all your performance data while tests run from back-end systems to front end performance.

    Your globally distributed performance testing teams have the responsibility of driving quality acrossyour enterprise while testing a broad range of application types, managing costs and deploying applications that meet the performance requirements of your business. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise delivers a collaborative testing platform that reduces complexity, centralizes resources and leverages shared assets and licenses to increase consistency across your enterprise.

    Sample Customers
    Chester Zoo
    Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm22%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Insurance Company11%
    Energy/Utilities Company10%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Computer Software Company19%
    Retailer11%
    Energy/Utilities Company11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business10%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise80%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise80%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Akamai CloudTest is ranked 12th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Akamai CloudTest is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Akamai CloudTest writes "Is easy to use and quick to setup, and does not require much resource capacity for medium instances". 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". Akamai CloudTest is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad and k6 Open Source, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Visual Studio Test Professional. See our Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.