Akamai CloudTest vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

"The solution is very stable."

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

"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."

"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."

"A vital feature of the solution is its ability to compose realistic scenarios for performance testing"

"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"

"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."

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

"The solution is easy to use."

"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."

"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"The product price could be more affordable."

"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."

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

"Some improvements can be made to the solution's user interface"

"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."

"The support team provides delayed responses."

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

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

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

"Running cost is very low."

"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."

"The solution is expensive."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"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."

"The solution’s price is considerably high."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"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."

"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."

"It is expensive compared to other tools."