"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Tricentis Flood is ranked 10th in Load Testing Tools with 3 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Flood is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enabled us to eliminate load generators, and automatically triggers and produces reports". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Flood writes "Awesome technical support, integrates well, and installation is easy". Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Tricentis Flood is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter. See our Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud vs. Tricentis Flood report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.
