We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and ReadyAPI 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 is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"We can book load generators."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."
"This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"It is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."
"One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"Canned reports are always a challenge and a question with customers because customers want to see sexy reports."
"The support team needs to be more coordinated."
"Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"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 TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."
"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."
"Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 33 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. 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 ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Eggplant Performance, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and Appvance IQ. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Performance 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.
