We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Oracle Application Testing Suite 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 can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"The ability to do multithreading. That's available in any performance testing tool, but the number of protocols that this particular tool supports has been very good."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"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 tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"The solution is scalable."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"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."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 9th in Performance Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. 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 Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and RadView WebLOAD, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio and Tricentis NeoLoad. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite 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.