We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The solution can scale."
"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 TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."
"Keeping up with DevOps, thus the best feature of StormRunner is that we don't have to build and maintain infrastructure anymore."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"Improvement in Selenium's ability to identify and wait for the page/element to load would be a big plus. This would ensure that our failed test cases will drop by 60%."
"The reporting part can be better."
"When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Enterprise modeling, server maintenance, and competitive pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
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.
