We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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 beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."
"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"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."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"The most valuable feature is the Vuser protocols."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"It is pretty easy to do test execution and results analysis. When it comes to scenario settings, LoadRunner Enterprise has an extra edge over other testing tools in the industry. The scenario setup is easy, and in terms of execution, we have a clear idea of what is happening"
"We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"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."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"The solution is expensive."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"OpenText needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."
"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter, Apache JMeter and OpenText UFT One, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
