We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution can scale."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"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."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."
"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"LoadRunner Professional's parameter data could be improved."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"
"Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Supports multiple protocols and helps to ensure that our applications are stable at any given point". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, BlazeMeter, Apache JMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional report.
See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Performance Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.