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 product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The solution can scale."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"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 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 solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"The user interface is fine."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"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."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
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.
