Akamai CloudTest vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."

"The solution is very stable."

"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."

"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."

"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."

"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."

"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."

"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."

"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 most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."

"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."

"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 reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."

"The test clip should be more user-friendly."

"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."

"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."

"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."

"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."

"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."

"The product price could be more affordable."

"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."

"The product must provide agents to monitor servers."

"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."

"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."

"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."

"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."

"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."

"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."

"Running cost is very low."

"The solution’s price is considerably high."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."

"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."

"LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."

"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."

"It's a very expensive solution"