We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise and Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional comes out on top in this comparison. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is a mature and feature-rich solution with a proven ROI, whereas Enterprise users report being dissatisfied with the product’s ROI.
"Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance."
"It is pretty easy to do test execution and results analysis. When it comes to scenario settings, LoadRunner Enterprise has an extra edge over other testing tools in the industry. The scenario setup is easy, and in terms of execution, we have a clear idea of what is happening"
"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."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"The ability to do multithreading. That's available in any performance testing tool, but the number of protocols that this particular tool supports has been very good."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"After they get over the acquisition, the first improvement is going to be tailoring it for their existing stack of other products. How would LoadRunner work for Documentum? How would it work for Business Network? How would it work for other apps? They can have a pre-package or a guide because they are all in the same family as opposed to being outside."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"LoadRunner experiences high resource utilization. Even though we have machines with higher configurations, I've observed this behavior. Heavy traffic recording results in the tool hanging. So heavy traffic recording makes the tool slow."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". 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 Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
