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."LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"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 TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"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."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"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 Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, 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.
