Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th)
Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
111
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (4th), Regression Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 13.5%, down 13.9% compared to last year.
Selenium HQ, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 3.7% mindshare, down 5.5% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. 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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to configure a lot of automated processes."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"It is very stable."
 

Cons

"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"
"LoadRunner experiences high resource utilization. Even though we have machines with higher configurations, I've observed this behavior. Heavy traffic recording results in the tool hanging. So heavy traffic recording makes the tool slow."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear."
"The login could be improved, to obviate the need for relying on another one for integration with Selenium HQ"
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's pricing is reasonable."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"There is an annual license required to use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. There are not any additional costs other than the licensing fees to use it."
"It is all free."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything."
"Selenium HQ costs around $1000 per month, which is a bit high based on what they're offering."
"The solution is open source."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"It is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.