We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Qualitia Automation Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is easy to use and has flexibility that allows it to be used on a variety of applications."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"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 solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"The support team needs to be more coordinated."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Qualitia Automation Studio is ranked 23rd in Test Automation Tools with 5 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Qualitia Automation Studio is rated 8.0. 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 Qualitia Automation Studio writes "Good Tool for Non Technical Users". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas Qualitia Automation Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One and Selenium HQ.
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.
