We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement."
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"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."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The solution is free to use."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"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."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
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.
