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

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs Tricentis Flood comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
Tricentis Flood
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 8.5%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Flood is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement
The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.
Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options
The solution is not in an optimal state. During POC, we analyzed tool is kept on upgrading. The patch deployment is happening in parallel, things that are working today are not working tomorrow. We eventually sorted it out with help of CSM. We integrated this tool with other software such as Azure client, but many times without a valid or visible reason, the connectivity was breaking. Improvement suggestions- The dashboard creation for the reporting needs to be easier. Currently, the solution does not support multiple script executions and we would like to see support for this.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 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"
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"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."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
 

Cons

"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"The product must provide agents to monitor servers."
"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."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"Sometimes, you are utilizing one of the low generators, then all of a sudden if you discontinue from one project, it actually deletes the entire low generator."
"Some improvements can be made to the solution's user interface"
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."
"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."
"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
23%
Real Estate/Law Firm
10%
Government
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
The pricing is high compared to other licensing tools like NeoLoad. It's not excessively expensive but higher than NeoLoad. However, in my experience, clients often weigh NeoLoad and LoadRunner equ...
Do you recommend Tricentis Flood?
Tricentis Flood is the kind of versatile load and performance testing solution that my organization and I cannot help but recommend. It is recognized by companies across a wide variety of fields as...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
Flood IO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Nike, heroku, Soulcycle, NEC, boston.com, Typeform, Xero, Telus
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. Tricentis Flood and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.