Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the #4 ranked solution in top Load Testing Tools and #6 ranked solution in top Performance Testing Tools. PeerSpot users give Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise an average rating of 8.0 out of 10. Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is most commonly compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional: Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise vs Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 77% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 20% of all views.
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Buyer's Guide

Download the Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2022

What is Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?

Micro Focus Performance Center is a global cross-enterprise performance testing tool which enables you to manage multiple, concurrent performance testing projects across different geographic locations without any need to travel between the locations. Performance Center administers all your internal performance testing needs. With Performance Center, you manage all aspects of large-scale performance testing projects, including resource allocation and scheduling, from a centralized location accessible through the Web. Performance Center helps streamline the testing process, reduce resource costs, and increase operating efficiency.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise was previously known as Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Video

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise pricing:
  • "I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
  • "The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
  • Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    NIKHIL_JAIN - PeerSpot reviewer
    Performance Test Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Full geographical coverage, integrates well with monitoring tools, granular project inspection capabilities
    Pros and Cons
    • "One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
    • "Micro Focus needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this solution for performance and load test different types of web-based applications and APIs. We want to make sure that before any application or any upgrade to an existing application is made available to an actual user, it is sufficiently tested within the organization.

    We want to ensure that if there is a high volume of users, they have a seamless experience. We don't want them to experience slowness or an interruption in service, as a result of an increase in the number of users on the web service or website. Essentially, we test to guarantee that all of our users have a good experience.

    How has it helped my organization?

    When it comes to delivering enterprise-level testing capabilities, this solution is really good.

    Using this tool, we are able to test an application end-to-end from any area. Specifically, we are able to test our applications that are used across geographies. This includes worldwide locations starting from one end of Asia to the other end of the Americas. Geographically, we have full testing coverage for virtually all of our enterprise applications.

    In terms of application coverage, there have been very few or no applications at the enterprise level that we have not been able to test using this tool. I think there is only one, but that was a unique case. Apart from that, at an enterprise level, in terms of coverage and geographically as well as technically, we have been able to test everything using this solution.

    Micro Focus has a platform where I can share what is good and what further improvements I can make. There is also a community where we can leave feedback.

    As an admin, I have the ability to copy all of the details from one project to another. However, I don't recall functionality for cross-project reporting. If there are two projects available then I cannot run a load test or report metrics from the other project.

    LoadRunner Enterprise offers multiple features to perform a deep dive into a project. For example, we can see how many load tests of a particular application were run over a certain period of time. We can also see what scripts and tests were built over a time period. There is lots of information that it provides.

    It is very important that we are able to drill down into an individual project because we sometimes have to look into what set of tests was executed for a particular project, as well as how frequently the tests were run. This helps us to determine whether the results were similar across different executions, or not. For us, this is an important aspect of the functionality that this tool provides.

    One of the major benefits, which is something that we have gained a lot of experience with, is the internal analytics capability. It has multiple graphical and analytical representations that we can use, and it has helped us a lot of times in pinpointing issues that could have caused SEV1 or SEV2 defects in production.

    We found that when we ran the load test, those issues were identified by using the analytic graphs that LoadRunner provides. Based on this knowledge, we have been able to make the required corrections to our applications. After retesting them, we were able to release them to production. This process is something that we find very useful.

    In terms of time, I find it pretty reasonable for test management. There are not too many things that we have to do before starting a load test. Once one becomes good at scripting, it does not take long. Of course, the length of time to run depends on how big and how complex the script is. Some load tests have five scripts, whereas some have between 25 and 30 scripts. On average, for a test with 10 scripts, the upper limit to set it up and run is a couple of hours.

    Overall, we don't spend too much time setting up our tests.

    What is most valuable?

    One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this. For example, a normal web application can be recorded and replayed again on many platforms. Moreover, it can be recorded in different ways.

    An application can be recorded based on your user experience, or just the backend code experience, or whether you want to record using a different technology, like a Java-specific recording, or a Siebel-specific recording. All of these different options and recording modes are available.

    The scheduling feature is very helpful because it shows me time slots in calendar format where I can view all of the tests that are currently scheduled. It also displays what infrastructure is available to me to schedule a load test if I need to.

    What needs improvement?

    Something that is missing is a platform where I can share practices with my team. I would like to be able to inform my team members of specific best practices, but at this point, I can only share scripts and stuff like that with them. Having a private community for my own team, where I can share information about best practices and skills, would be helpful.

    Micro Focus needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated.

    The monitoring and related analytical capabilities for load tests should be brought up to industry standards. This product integrates well with tools like Dynatrace and AppDynamics but having the built-in functionality improved would be a nice thing to have.

    Buyer's Guide
    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise
    November 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
    655,774 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for approximately 15 years. It was previously known as Performance Center and before that, it was simply LoadRunner. In terms of continuous, uninterrupted usage, it has been for approximately nine years.

    I am a long-time user of Micro Focus products and have worked on them across multiple organizations.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Our tool is hosted on-premises and we have not faced stability issues as such. One of the problems that we sometimes experience is that suddenly, multiple machines become unresponsive and cannot be contacted. We call these the load generators in LoadRunner nomenclature. When this happens, we have to restart the central server machine and then, everything goes back to normal. That sort of issue happens approximately once in six months.

    Apart from that, we have not observed any stability issues. There are some defects within the tool which from time to time, we have raised with Micro Focus. If they have a fix available, they do provide it. Importantly, it does not make the product unusable until that is fixed.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This product is easy to scale and as a user, we have not encountered any such issues. Over time, if I have to add more machines to monitor, or if I have to add more machines to use during a load test, it's pretty straightforward.

    If I compare it with other tools, I would say that it does not scale as well. However, as a user, it is okay and I've never faced any issues with adding more machines.

    How are customer service and support?

    Whenever we have any support required from Micro Focus, the process begins with us submitting a ticket and they normally try to solve it by email. But if required, they are okay with having a video conference or an audio conference. They use Cisco technology for conferencing and they are responsive to collaboration.

    Unfortunately, technical support is not as good as it used to be. From an end-user perspective, coming from both me and several of my team members, we have found that over the last year and a half, the quality of support has gone down a couple of notches. It has been since the transition from HP to Micro Focus, where the support is simply no longer at the same level.

    The level of support changes based on the plan that you have but our plan has not changed, whereas the responsiveness and coordination have. Generally speaking, interacting with HP was better than it is with Micro Focus, which is something that should be improved.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I have not used other similar tools.

    How was the initial setup?

    I have not set up other tools, so I don't have a basis for comparison. That said, I find that setting up LoadRunner Enterprise is not very straightforward.

    Whether it's an initial setup or an upgrade to our existing setup, it's very time-consuming. There are lots of things that we have to look into and understand throughout the process. It takes a lot of time and resources and that is one of the reasons we are considering moving to the cloud version. Ideally, our effort in upgrading to the newer versions is reduced by making the transition. The last couple of upgrades have been very consuming in terms of time and effort, which could have been spent on more productive work.

    To be clear, I was not involved in setting it up initially. Each time we deploy this product, we set it up as a new one but use our older version as a base. Prior to the configuration, we have to update it. However, it is older and it does not upgrade, so we have to install it as a new version. I do not see a significant difference in time between installing afresh and upgrading an existing installation. 

    If I am able to identify the needs and what is required, from that point, it takes almost the same amount of time whether it is a clean install or an upgrade. The biggest challenge with LoadRunner Enterprise is to identify the database that we're using and then upgrade it. As soon as the database is upgraded successfully, 70% to 75% of the work is complete. It is the biggest component, takes the longest, and is the most effort-consuming as well.

    What about the implementation team?

    I am involved in the installation and maintenance, including upgrades.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I did not evaluate other tools before implementing this one.

    What other advice do I have?

    At this time, we do not make use of LoadRunner Developer Integration. We are thinking of migrating to the latest version of LoadRunner, which probably has the LoadRunner Developer functionality. Once we upgrade to the new version, we plan to use it.

    We are not currently using any of the cloud functionality offered by Micro Focus. In our organization, we do have multiple applications that are hosted on the cloud, and we do test them using LoadRunner Enterprise, but we do not use any component of LoadRunner Enterprise that is hosted on the cloud.

    I am an active member in several online communities, including LinkedIn, that are specific to performance testing. As such, I have seen different experts using different tools, and the overall impression that I get from LoadRunning Enterprise is that it offers good value for the price. The level of coverage in terms of scripting and analysis had helped to solidify their position as a market leader, at least a decade ago.

    Nowadays, while others have closed the gap, it is still far ahead of other tools in the space. My advice is that if LoadRunner Enterprise can be made to fit within the budget, it is the best tool for performance testing and load testing.

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    PeerSpot user
    Sreenivasula Mukkamalla - PeerSpot reviewer
    Sr.Engineer csit Quality Assurance at a tech consulting company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    User-friendly, with up to date features, offers good visibility over changes in the scripting, and has a very responsive technical support team
    Pros and Cons
    • "What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
    • "A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for load testing and stress testing. We also use it for running performance schedulers during specific times. We also use the solution to determine testing trends. We're using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise less for TruClient because the TruClient protocol takes up a lot of memory.

    What is most valuable?

    What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center.

    I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time.

    What needs improvement?

    A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard.

    For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user.

    Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc.

    The report from Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise would show you the difference between two exhibitions, if I did one today at 12:00 PM and another at 12:00 PM tomorrow, but if you want to see the difference between three or more exhibitions, the solution doesn't have that option. To see the difference, you'll need to do more work in terms of uploading files and doing the comparisons manually, and this should be improved.

    An added feature I'd like to see in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is a converter. I'd also like a performance file extraction feature in the scripting alone. For example, if I'm using the JMX file, I should be able to convert it within the solution, same with other files such as the HAR and PCAP files. Whatever performance file is there, if I can extract it and make a script, that would be a very valuable addition to Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Another example is if you're not able to record the script in the solution, if there is that option with a PCAP or HAR file, for example, a converter, that will add some value. There's a conversion for the HAR file, but with the PCAP file, I'm not so sure.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for three years now.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is a very stable solution. My company only had to contact the Micro Focus team twice when there was an issue related to tailor-made requirements within my organization, but it wasn't because of a Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise feature, and other than that, I didn't see any issues regarding its stability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is a scalable solution.

    How are customer service and support?

    The technical support team for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is very responsive. My company contacted support about an issue that was related to requirements tailored to my organization and the team helped in resolving the issue and making the solution stable.

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise has a very responsive technical support team that was upfront in informing my team when it's feasible to set up a meeting, and when the issue needs to be redirected to another person who's knowledgeable about it.

    On a scale of one to five, I would rate the Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise technical support team four out of five.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Before Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, we used Apache JMeter which was the only other option because it's an open-source tool. It was deployed on-premises and not on the cloud.

    We also used the normal version of the Performance Center before Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise which was two years prior and we had to install the Performance Center on-premises and set up load generators and load controllers. The Enterprise version we've been using for the past three years.

    The main differences between Apache JMeter, the Performance Center, and Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise are the usability and insights given by the last two solutions. Both the Performance Center and Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise give more insights, and they also offer more automation versus Apache JMeter.

    With Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise and the Performance Center, users can leverage a quick exhibition after setting up the scenario, doing quick checks, and creating reports, but in Apache JMeter, users have to manually set up, observe, and do the reports.

    There are more features in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise as well as it's cloud-based versus Apache JMeter which is only a plug-in, so we have to do everything manually in Apache JMeter.

    How was the initial setup?

    In terms of how easy or complex setting up Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is, I'm not the right person to ask because a different team handles the setup in my company. The solution is set up on the cloud, on-demand, and requires load generators or controllers, but I didn't take part in setting it up. I'm just an end-user that utilizes Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    As I'm an end-user of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise and not involved in its licensing, I don't have information on how much it costs.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I evaluated Apache JMeter before using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

    What other advice do I have?

    In terms of the number of resources using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I'm in a large organization, and in the beginning, there were ten resources. Nowadays, with the solution being tailor-made for my company, twenty-five to thirty resources belonging to different teams use Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

    The solution is used every day as my company can't live without performance testing.

    I'm rating Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise nine out of ten because it still has some room for improvement.

    My company is a customer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise
    November 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
    655,774 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Senior IT Process Analyst at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Helps us to identify performance bottlenecks and increase testing efficiency
    Pros and Cons
    • "We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
    • "It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."

    What is our primary use case?

    Performance testing is an integral part of the testing life cycle. It determines whether the application being rolled out for end-users is in line with our expectations. It contributes quite well.

    Initially, we had a completely on-premises implementation of LoadRunner. In 2018, we moved to cloud. The load generators are still internal, but the rest of the components sit in the Micro Focus cloud environment as a SaaS enterprise solution.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It's quite versatile. As a company, we have applications that span across different platforms and technologies, including legacy. We've been using it for applications on mainframes and with the latest technologies as well. We are able to attain our requirements from a performance testing standpoint. It helps us to be confident and to be aware of where issues are before we release a product to a wider audience.

    When you have that scalability, it helps in performing end-to-end testing seamlessly. Our organization has applications that span multiple applications and technologies, to complete a single business process. That type of scalability helps us to achieve our performance testing objectives.

    It has definitely helped us to identify the performance bottlenecks. Whenever we get into the procurement of other applications, we consider the historical performance KPIs. That really helps us to define those optimum KPIs with respect to other vendors.

    In terms of efficiency, certain features have been introduced that were quite complementary and have really helped us with our delivery.

    What is most valuable?

    We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with.

    LoadRunner helps to facilitate sharing of best practices and skills. That's the way we expect any enterprise tool to work. It helps us to follow best practices and share them with other teams as well. It's quite important to have that consistency in terms of the quality of deliverables. It plays a key role. It enables us to have that benchmarking in terms of quality and is one of the crucial requirements for us.

    The cross-project reporting and business views are among the valuable features because a huge platform can have multiple projects that are being executed in parallel. In that scenario, the reporting provides a holistic view for the stakeholders.

    What needs improvement?

    It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes. That also applies to when we need to deal with applications that are adopting the latest technologies, where our company doesn't have a footprint. It would help us to have a better view and be prepared to address those requirements efficiently.

    The Micro Focus team has done a good job of introducing us to product owners and product managers, and in talking about the upcoming roadmap and features of the tool. That's been quite good. But when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We've been using LoadRunner since 2012.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The current licensing model is something that offers us flexibility, compared to what we had earlier. That's something which is really beneficial.

    Any plans to increase our usage of LoadRunner depend on the business demand. Our company depends on a number of IT applications for which implementation is planned and are in scope for performance testing. We will carve out a plan for introducing performance testing of them.

    Penetration and performance testing have increased over time and we are growing well. For applications that are already in the maintenance phase, depending on the volume of change that is introduced into them and how critical they are, we introduce performance testing. However, the number of custom applications is quite limited within our company.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    So far, Micro Focus technical support has been smooth.

    The solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP. A few years ago, we also wanted support for IoT. That did not exist. That's something we requested and the product team added it to the roadmap.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Since the early days, we were with HP Performance Center, and then with Micro Focus LoadRunner. We have stuck with the same supplier and product.

    How was the initial setup?

    We have become very accustomed to the product, using it as long as we have. We have never come across any kind of difficulty and we have received support from the vendor whenever we have required help.

    Our migration to LoadRunner Cloud happened in 2018, and took approximately six months. Our company was being cautious because we wanted to ensure business continuity, so we went for a phased project migration approach.

    We went with that approach because there were multiple aspects that needed to be taken care of, from a security standpoint. We had to get required clearances because we needed to open certain ports and firewalls. That took some time. Once that was cleared, we did a proof of concept and quickly started moving projects in a phased manner, and we haven't seen many difficulties since then.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The contract that we had with Micro Focus was a bit complex, but now it's much simpler. As a customer, I have clarity about it. That is something that helps us to serve the business better.

    What other advice do I have?

    It's a tool that really helps you when you have a very varied landscape and you have technologies and platforms and infrastructure which include legacy and new ones, with a mix of SaaS. LoadRunner has the ability to support different protocols and that serves the purpose. It's a one-stop solution.

    We wanted to integrate LoadRunner reports to a time-series database, an open-source tool like Grafana. We learned a lot from that integration. The integration of the solution into a CI pipeline is something that we haven't explored widely, but it's an area we are looking forward to investing in soon. We are exploring more in terms of the integration capabilities of LoadRunner with other tools.

    Performance testing is a specialized skill and we don't have too many using the solution, but we do have a couple of professionals who have been doing performance testing for more than 15 years. The rest have been into performance testing for the last seven to eight years, with exposure to different protocols and technologies. We are aiming to scale up and cross-train them in multiple protocols so that we can reach some of our goals without any hindrance this year. We would like to have less dependency, in terms of expertise, on specific technologies and protocols.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    PeerSpot user
    Ashok Kumar K - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Test Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    MSP
    Top 20
    Feature-rich with good documentation but can be expensive
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."
    • "They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."

    What is our primary use case?

    We do have an address to the client protocol we are using, and web streaming and web services. 

    What is most valuable?

    With LoadRunner, 80% of the cases will be supported. It has everything. It supports most features. It's very feature-rich.

    The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation.

    What needs improvement?

    While they keep on working on improving the tool level, the tool has instability in terms of loading and processing. There are a lot of times hanging issues up until version 11 or 11.2. After that, the productions are pretty stable. 

    They changed the GUI. 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 implementation process can be a bit complex. Even with 15 years of experience, I have trouble finding things. 

    They need to make scalability functionality better.

    We've raised hundreds of bugs in the Ajax TruClient protocol. I don't know how they are doing testing. However, they should test it in other scenarios. When you're releasing a protocol, the test coverage should be more. They need to do a better job at releasing a full product instead of releasing something half-done and fixing it along the way.

    The solution is expensive. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for ten years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution does have some instability and hanging issues. It has to be improved as it is causing a business loss for them.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability-wise, it has to improve in certain protocols. If you take Ajax TruClient, the memory consumption was very huge in the terms of the particular protocol. That needs to be somewhere where we can minimize the memory consumption to have more virtual users run on the system. 

    People need to buy too many load generators to run their tests. Even for file users, we need a lot of load generators to run that.

    We have seven to eight team members using the solution right now. 

    We have been using it for the past 10 years with the same client. We have all the version upgrades happening from LoadRunner ALM products onwards. We went into the ALM Enterprise. And we were the people who raised hundreds of bugs in the Ajax TruClient protocol. 

    How are customer service and support?

    We've dealt with lots of bugs, and we scheduled a meeting for support. They take some time to get to a solution. They'll sometimes take months to get a solution in place.

    I understand it is not a small thing when you are launching a new protocol and all. However, they should have, before launching, fewer bugs. They need to take care of a lot of things before launching the product.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We've used JMeter, WebLOAD, and NeoLoad.

    While Micro Focus' competition does offer a lot of tools, this solution does a better job of laying out guidelines.  There are examples and use cases, and they respond to questions. Those are the reasons people are still using them.

    How was the initial setup?

    The installation process is a little complex. There has been confusion in terms of the Enterprise version and whatever they have in the exhibition suite. We call it ALM. The UI is not as user-friendly now with the changes they have made. It would help if they simplified their interface a bit. It might make implementation easier. 

    It used to be simpler. Now we have a separate team that handles the setup.

    We have two people available that can deploy and maintain the product.

    What was our ROI?

    We don't see an ROI as we mainly recommend the tool and clients use it.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    It's a costly tool. When you are paying for something, there are expectations that it will work properly.

    I'd rate the affordability at a two out of five. 

    You do need to buy a few extra features that are not included in the main cost.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are customers.

    If a client has a budget, I would recommend the solution. It is a good tool. However, there are stability issues, and it does have a complex UI. It's good if you have specific protocols and specific requirements. When that is the case, there may be no other tool available. 

    I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Senior Consultant at Capgemini
    Real User
    Top 5
    A market leader that provides good analysis and is quick to install
    Pros and Cons
    • "What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
    • "Integration can be tricky during the setup process."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have used it for most of our web-based application testing. We have more than 25 applications that are tested with this tool, with a load of more than 1,000 users as well. It's mostly for the enterprise applications like CRM or Citrix, as well as the Google Toolkit applications, and then there are the different protocols that this particular LoadRunner supports, like through clients or APS services. Those are where we can capture and run our tests with the LoadRunner.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Looking at the load of more of the applications and the testing needs have definitely been met. Even new users or interns can manage the solution, so there's a low learning curve.

    It's a market leader and a pioneer. People enjoy working on it. It helps give them a career boost and opens up opportunities. 

    What is most valuable?

    What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution. With it, you could do reports and it does all the statistics, and then you can do the cross-verification or cross-analysis as well to look at comparisons. Those are fascinating.

    The installation is quick.

    What needs improvement?

    The UI and how they show different methodologies of monitoring need improvement. We'd like to integrate data from different clouds as well as different servers. 

    Integration can be tricky during the setup process. 

    Technical support in not helpful or responsive. 

    They have been doing a lot actually to improve the product right now. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for more than ten years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Most of the time, the solution is stable. If our environment is stable, the solution is reliable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution can scale. We've been using it for most users and have been increasing our servers - and they have LoadRunner installed on them. We are expanding usage. However, the cost may be a deciding factor. 

    We have six people using it in our company.

    How are customer service and support?

    Support is very poor. We've had a very frustrating experience with them. Initially, when you raise issues with them, they always send a link to some sort of document that is useless to us. After two or three follow-ups on our end, we might start getting answers. Once we escalate further, we get to the professionals, and only then will we get to a solution.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Negative

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously used IBM's Rational Robot, as well Silk Performer.

    How was the initial setup?

    The installation was quick, however, getting integration and getting the data flowing, that's tricky. We need to rely entirely on the Micro Focus team for that. It's not like we can do it in-house. Though we know how to install it, there are a lot of complications when we try to go through it. 

    We had three people deploy the solution and two people are available for maintenance. 

    What about the implementation team?

    We had the Micros Focus team assist us with the initial setup process. 

    What was our ROI?

    We have witnessed an ROI, however, when you take into account how we're costing it's likely not a helpful number to share. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is pretty expensive. I can't speak to the exact cost. I'd rate it three out of five in terms of affordability.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We did evaluate one or two other options before choosing LoadRunner. We looked at Silk Performer and another solution called Compuware. 

    What other advice do I have?

    I am not using the latest version of the solution.

    While we use on-premises deployments right now, we are starting to look into the cloud. 

    I'd advise potential new users to look at their budget. If it's a larger enterprise, LoadRunner will make sense due to the big environment. If budget is a concern for a company, it may be better to look at other options. 

    I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Shuaib Gill - PeerSpot reviewer
    Test Lead Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 10
    Straightforward to set up, good or modifying script and offers support
    Pros and Cons
    • "I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
    • "The solution is expensive."

    What is our primary use case?

    Mostly it's to test APIs. That's been the main use case.

    What is most valuable?

    I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself. You can make a quick change.

    The setup is straightforward. 

    It's a stable solution. 

    Support is helpful. 

    What needs improvement?

    Honestly, there really isn't any area for improvement. I think it's a great product.

    Maybe the scroll bars could be a little bit bigger.

    The solution is expensive. 

    If they had an easy integration with, let's say, New Relic or Dynatrace, that would be something interesting. If we can see server monitoring data in the LoadRunner report, that would be ideal.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for one year.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The product is reliable. It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We don't have too many people on the solution right now. We have ten to 15 people using it. We're using it almost daily. It's used 60% to 70% of the time. 

    How are customer service and support?

    Support has been okay. Yeah, they've been pretty knowledgeable about everything. Responses are generally on time. I typically get a response within a day or so.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously used WebLOAD. In WebLOAD, to set it up, if your script needs to use a data file, it's a wizard. It takes six or seven steps to set it up. In LoadRunner, it's a lot easier. It doesn't take that long. It's a very straightforward process.  

    The other thing is, RadView uses JavaScript language for the script, whereas LoadRunner uses C. LoadRunner recently has given the option for testers to use JavaScript as well. You can add more users on a LoadRunner test. Their load gens are more scalable. They allow more users with load gen than with RadView.

    Right now, we tend to prefer LoadRunner.

    How was the initial setup?

    The implementation was very straightforward. 

    I'd rate the process four out of five in terms of ease of implementation. 

    What about the implementation team?

    The entire implementation process was handled in-house. We did not use any consultants or integrators. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I don't know this as a fact. However, I've heard that LoadRunner is pricey.

    I have heard from different customers that although LoadRunner's a great product, sometimes they are looking for alternatives, since the pricing model for LoadRunner's very expensive. Sometimes customers will look at other options for testing tools due to the cost.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm an end-user.

    I'd recommend the solution. For API testing, LoadRunner, getting the script developed in LoadRunner is very straightforward. It's not super difficult. You can get a REST API script in LoadRunner done within an hour if you have all the information and if you know the HTTP headers and stuff like that. You can get it up and running in an hour. 

    I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. I would give them a perfect score if the pricing was better.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Sr. Software Engineer at Wells Fargo
    Real User
    Simple and user-friendly; remote servers can be monitored while running tests on the dashboard
    Pros and Cons
    • "Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
    • "Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use LRE to develop script and we use VuGen, a component of LoadRunner, for result analysis. Those two components are responsible for generating load and then injecting it into a particular system. We develop the script on VuGen, and create a smooth scenario on LRE that uses a load generator and controller to run the test. The controller then collects the results and we carry out an analysis. We are customers of Micro Focus.

    What is most valuable?

    Creating the script is very easy and user friendly. If you need to simulate a use case, it's easily recorded using VuGen. It also enables the creation of monitors for a particular system which includes FD dashboards. Remote servers can also be monitored while your test is running on the LRE dashboard.

    What needs improvement?

    I'd like to be able to carry out transaction comparisons with previous tests. It's a feature of NetStorm that I'd like to see in LRE. Currently, we can only compare averages to transition response time. Having that ability to compare would highlight any patterns, comparing them with results at regular intervals. We'd be able to know what was going on throughout the testing process. 

    Some of the scripts we use require some custom JARS. It requires importing something to the script if those have been embedded. If that process could be automated, it would make a difference. Whether it's MQ, Kafka or JDBC, those kinds of binaries could be part of a bundle. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for two years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We had some initial issues that were resolved and since then the stability has been good. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We haven't used their scalability capabilities yet, but I'm sure it's good.

    How are customer service and support?

    Their technical support is excellent.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was carried out before I began working in the company but I believe it's very straightforward. We have 70 performance engineers using this solution in my team. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We are an enterprise company so we have a license with Micro Focus. I believe that if you have up to 50 users, there is an open-source option. 

    What other advice do I have?

    I would recommend downloading the software for personal use to test it out. The solution solves my needs and provides everything required to carry out performance load testing so I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Global Delivery Head at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Priced high, needs more features, but good performance
    Pros and Cons
    • "Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools."
    • "Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for performance testing one of the client's ERP solutions.

    What is most valuable?

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools. 

    What needs improvement?

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for approximately four years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability and performance of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise are very good. It is a very established tool and there are not any issues with the reliability.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is highly scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    The support from Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise has been excellent.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We tried NeoLoad previously. We found that NeoLoad is a good competitor to Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive.

    What other advice do I have?

    When comparing Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise with the competitors that are coming into the market, I would look for an open-source version of this tool, if possible. The cost is one thing that is preventing people from using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. 

    Some of the upcoming protocols are coming into the market, some of these are not supported by Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. I can easily choose NeoLoad and complete what I need to with it. 

    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is still evolving in the coming DevOps sector,  once the CICD architecture comes in, we will see more changes. I presume it is not up to date from a CICD support perspective.

    I rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise a five out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: November 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.