We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."
"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"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."
"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The product has many features."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"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."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."
"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"There could be API interfaces with this tool."
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 72 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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 SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
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.
