We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"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."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"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."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"What I found most valuable in Worksoft Certify is its identification feature. I also found its automation feature valuable."
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility."
"The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools."
"It helps us to implement automation testing as part of most projects, so the need for manual testing can be reduced. This really accelerates the testing process as a whole. Before, where it could take ten days to test a project, now it takes only one or two days to do the complete testing."
"It's very different versus other tools in the past, which were not very modern. It easy for people to automate."
"We love the Capture 2.0 feature. It seems to work very well."
"What I like about Worksoft Certify is that end-to-end testing becomes faster."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"For Execution Manager, I would like it to be more robust interface and be able to view the remote machines full screen instead of a little window."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"I would like the GUI to be more user-friendly and intuitive. We want to be able to move assets from project to another project without having to be in the same project or the same folder structure."
"I would like Worksoft Certify to do automation at any layer (the UI layer, API layer, or database layer) and challenge competitors in the RPA industry, like UiPath and Automation Anywhere."
"We have had run ins with some bugs on Business Process Procedure (BPP) and Execution Manager."
"We are looking for some enhancements on the Capture 2.0 tool. This would give us the ability to control it directly, like we could with Capture 1.0. Right now, Capture 2.0 doesn't really work for our Business Analysts."
"It is poor for a web based application."
"The primary area for improvement is the support service."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 5th in Test Automation Tools with 64 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA).
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.
