OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise comparison

"It is stable and reliable."

"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."

"OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."

"It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."

"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."

"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."

"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."

"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."

"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."

"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."

"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."

"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."

"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."

"LoadRunner's UI is project-convenient, allowing easier simulation of real-time scenarios and producing comprehensive reports that are effortless to read."

"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."

"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist."

"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."

"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."

"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."

"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."

"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."

"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."

"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."

"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."

"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."

"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."

"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."

"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."

"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."

"OpenText needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."

"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."

"This is an expensive solution."

"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."

"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."

"Compared to the market, the price is high."

"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."

"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."

"The tool is very expensive."

"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."

"We purchased the license via SAP."

"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."

"The price is really steep. It's an enterprise-level tool."

"There is an ROI. What LoadRunner does, is it prevents failures when there are many, many concurrent users in the systems of a company."

"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."

"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."