Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cavisson NetStorm vs OpenText LoadRunner Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

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

Cavisson NetStorm
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Cavisson NetStorm is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.0%, down from 14.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1329360 - PeerSpot reviewer
Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase
NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage. NetStorm has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase. One more great functionality is the ability to control the load runtime by increasing or decreasing the virtual users or pausing the users to keep on repeating the transactions without exiting.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. 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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
 

Cons

"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"Sometimes when we were migrating from one version to another, some of our scripts started failing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"NetStorm is priced well when compared to many well-known tools."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"There is an annual license required to use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. There are not any additional costs other than the licensing fees to use it."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
20%
Retailer
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Oracle, Macy's, Redbox, art.com, Pronto Networks, A10 Networks, Renesas, San Jose Medical Group
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about Cavisson NetStorm vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.