We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and ReadyAPI Performance 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 solution is quite stable."
"It is actually a very good tool because it will support almost all, if not all, industry-standard protocols, and it is also equipped with very nice reporting capabilities, which is why I like it."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"We can scale."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while ReadyAPI Performance is ranked 10th in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while ReadyAPI Performance is rated 8.2. 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 Performance writes "Straightforward to install with the ability to add multiple assertions but the price is too high". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas ReadyAPI Performance is most compared with SmartBear LoadNinja and Apache JMeter. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. ReadyAPI Performance 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.