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

Ixia IxLoad vs OpenText LoadRunner Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Ixia IxLoad
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
16th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
19th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Ixia IxLoad is 1.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.3%, down from 15.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Use Ixia IxLoad?
Share your opinion
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 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
Computer Software Company
24%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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

Marks & Spencer
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.