We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"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."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"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."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"The most valuable feature is having a no-code solution for automation, so our QA team and some of our business users can work on automation. Then, they don't have to be developers."
"We prefer Worksoft over other platforms because it's a low-code solution"
"A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool."
"The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers."
"We are mainly using it for the SAP application, and for the SAP application, if you don't have any experience with automation tools, after a few training sessions, you can easily automate the scripts. That's because no specific programming language is used. All resources that I have are specifically SAP resources. They are not from the automation background, but after gaining the knowledge, they are able to develop a script, or when there is any issue while doing regression testing, they are at least able to understand the issue, such as whether the issue is in the code or data."
"We are now trying to automate all our applications: SAP, web, third-party, and legacy. Instead of multiple tools, we have been able to have Worksoft handle a lot of our applications. This has saved us a lot of time and effort."
"Provides all the in-built functionalities and is a wonderful tool."
"The Capture 2.0 feature is very intuitive, useful, and user-friendly. You can do so much with it now, versus the older version."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"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."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"One feature that could be added to Capture 2.0 is generating a PDF file from your capture, so you can see your screenshots and steps."
"For the couple of the issues that we were really scratching our heads over, we were in communication with the technical support several times, but they never got back to us."
"The primary area for improvement is the support service."
"We can't get the process intelligence module to work properly. We can't get the impact comment that analyzes the incoming development code to run, either. We've also had bugs in the CTM and execution manager in the past year. It took technical support a long time to resolve this issue. We escalated it so that the vice president of the company was included as well."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 64 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and UiPath Test Suite.
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.
