We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and SmartBear LoadNinja 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."There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"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."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"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."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"It needs time to mature."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while SmartBear LoadNinja is ranked 14th in Performance Testing Tools with 3 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while SmartBear LoadNinja is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear LoadNinja writes "Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and ReadyAPI, whereas SmartBear LoadNinja is most compared with Apache JMeter, ReadyAPI Performance, BlazeMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and Selenium HQ. See our OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. SmartBear LoadNinja 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.