No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs OpenText Service Virtualization comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Ranking in Service Virtualization
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Service Virtualiza...
Ranking in Service Virtualization
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Service Virtualization category, the mindshare of Broadcom Service Virtualization is 25.7%, down from 26.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Service Virtualization is 17.2%, up from 12.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Service Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization25.7%
OpenText Service Virtualization17.2%
Other57.1%
Service Virtualization
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user142806 - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation QA Specialist at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Nov 06, 2014
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
Aphiwat Leetavorn. - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Marco Technology
Is scalable and easy to use, but the monitoring feature needs improvement
The support for Micro Focus Service Virtualization is better than that for other products. The technical support staff are highly skilled. Sometimes, we don't have to open a ticket. We can just go into the community and then talk to them directly. I would rate technical support at seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"CA Service Virtualization is totally number one in the market, no one comes close to this."
"CA Service Virtualization is an amazing solution, very easy to use, easy to train others on how to take advantage of it."
"Of all the products, I think Service Virtualization is the easiest one to sell and the easiest one to get your arms around as to why there's a benefit, and I was able to sell it quite readily into the company for those very reasons."
"The solution helps us develop applications faster."
"It provides us a high level of integration with all of our solutions, to the extent that we can set up modules with Service Virtualization functionality at the same time."
"It is definitely scalable."
"Having a virtual service to rely on, we’re able to continue development even when one of their services fails."
"We have had developers produce code later than we wanted to, but we've had some other stuff that was dependent on that. So what we were able to do was virtualize these assets and then go forward with our developer and not have to wait for these additional services to be available."
"Service Virtualization plays a major role in transforming your development, testing, and operating engineer into a business engineer."
"We choose HPE servers because they're rock solid."
"HPE SV helped me and my ALM team minimize workforce, reduce costs, and transition from hardware to virtualization; my software is more secure preproduction."
"I was blown away with how fast the implementation was."
"Service Virtualization cuts down dependency across dev as well as any third party components."
"Service virtualization enables our teams to create, develop, and test software against virtual services that simulate real service behavior with no constraints, available anytime."
"Shift-Left by enabling Build and QA teams to conduct Development Integration/ API / Performance / System Integration Testing Remove wait times for constrained services and speed delivery Reduce infrastructure costs Eliminate expenses from dev/test access to third-party services Reduce downtime risk"
"With Service Virtualization, it's much less expensive and we can turn them off and on when we need to."
 

Cons

"I have noticed performance issues such as the virtual server requires a restart after using it for a certain amount of time, to make sure it responds better."
"The initial setup of this solution is not straightforward at all; the installation is unnecessarily complex, and user-friendliness is not an area that CA DevTest can boast about."
"The solution required a lot of CPU memory, but using enough PC OZU fixed the problems."
"Usability in the prior version that we used, version 8.2, usability is not great."
"CA SV takes up lot of your system resources."
"VSE Console should be more user friendly."
"Their knowledge management system is not up to the mark. The search functionality really needs to be improved."
"UI Testing and Reporting Features."
"HP should work on providing better scripting support and include more communication and transport protocols."
"It could needs to be a lot more scalable."
"The developers area Performance testers"
"More support for different protocols. I would love to see more wizards rather than relying on some custom coding, which you can use C# as well as Visual Basic scripting. In the service virtualization platform, I would love to see more wizard features as well as the ability to connect to an external database, which by the way, we have put an enhancement request in for. I'd love to see that in the service virtualization platform."
"I’m rating it a 7 because it is not a fully evolved virtualization tool compared to other tools offering the same service."
"HPE products are good, but they never make a product for a specific use. They make a product for the enterprise because that is their vision. They like multi-generational business plans. That means that they don't deliver small bits and pieces, but rather, they deliver to the enterprise."
"I would like them to reduce the cost of the licenses."
"I am not impressed with the technical support provided by Micro Focus (for an official ticket)."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"Micro Service Virtualization is very expensive. The pricing of this product is in line with all of the other big name-brand products."
"It's an expensive solution, but you can get discounts. You have to buy one server and one designer together, for example, and it may cost 15 million Thai Baht."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user142806 - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation QA Specialist at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Nov 6, 2014
Nov 6, 2014
Check out the comparison of CA Lisa and HP Service Virtualization at http://www.itcentralstation.com/products/comparisons/hp-service-virtualization_vs_ca-lisa
2 out of 6 answers
it_user137409 - PeerSpot reviewer
Works with 10,001+ employees
Jul 30, 2014
Hello, Unfortunately, I don’t have experience in CA Lisa SV. However, I have evaluated HP SV and have an opinion about it – I can share my thoughts if you need, but I don’t think that it will help you to answer the question. “What needs to be considered when comparing them?” Of course a lot is depends on your necessities, but for the most of cases it doesn’t matter what tools you are going to compare – I believe that all the needs are the same because of the domain area (SV in this case). - Number of Protocols supported - Record and Reproduce possibility - Create virtual services from scratch - Easiness of installing, configuring and using - Extended possibilities for creation more complex virtual endpoints (db support, data stores, team using, etc.) - Other deeper criteria Thank you. Best Regards, Dzianis Sushko EPAM Integration Competency Center
it_user105102 - PeerSpot reviewer
Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Jul 30, 2014
HP Service Test and CA Lisa are not comparable products. HP Service Test is comparable to Soap UI- create scripts/tests that drive data to a web service. HP Service Test is one of three products in the HP Unified Functional Testing Suite: what used to be Quick Test Professional, Service Test and Service Test Manager.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
25%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Outsourcing Company
19%
Transportation Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
 

Also Known As

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
Micro Focus Service Virtualization, HPE Service Virtualization
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, 
Virgin Media, TTNet
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. OpenText Service Virtualization and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.