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

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs Worksoft Certify comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th), Load Testing Tools (5th)
Worksoft Certify
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 6.0%, down 8.0% compared to last year.
Worksoft Certify, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 4.4% mindshare, down 4.5% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
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. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
Shailesh-Parkhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful automation tool with a user-friendly interface, codeless automation, and adaptability to complex business processes, particularly in SAP environments
The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers. Even during the initial learning phase, I found it remarkably user-friendly. It facilitates quick onboarding and training of new resources. It offers features for building automation scripts, such as search and certify capture. A notable advantage is that it doesn't rely on other tools like Micro Focus UFT or Micro Focus ALM for script execution. Worksoft can run independently without the need for support from Microsoft Office, although the option to use it for maintaining data exists. The tool also includes debugging features and comprehensive reporting capabilities, generating PDF reports for easy analysis.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"The user interface is fine."
"It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it."
"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"People who don't have coding knowledge are capable of doing automation with Certify. It reduces coding and scripting dependencies."
"The Capture 2.0 feature is good. Our clients like using it. It does not take long to create documentation."
"The solution has cut our clients' test maintenance time for changes, like patches or system upgrades. They used to take a lot of time until the production validation completed. Now, it is just seconds until it is ready, so they can do executions within couple of minutes."
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
"With Worksoft, we have been able to automate six of our smoke tests in four months."
"If we write a new test that's 80 percent the same as an existing test, it is pretty straightforward to reuse the steps from existing tests for our new tests and build upon them."
"For my processes, Worksoft makes them faster when creating scripts."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
 

Cons

"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"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."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despite its advantages, leading them to alternatives like JMeter and RPT."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"I am aware that they have some challenges with some of their support resources, especially offshore which is very common. I don't think this is specifically a Worksoft issue. It always seems to be a software issue, and I know that Worksoft is aware of this and they are trying to make some improvements."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"The stability needs help. This is main thing that needs help, and if it's not the stability, then it's Worksoft's ability to respond to issues."
"Capture 2.0 is not as useful when you get into more mature automation."
"Reportings are not user-friendly."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"The primary area for improvement is the support service."
"One feature that could be added to Capture 2.0 is generating a PDF file from your capture, so you can see your screenshots and steps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"ROI is 200%."
"Saving money and better quality, these are the benefits of Certify."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"We have seen ROI by being able to free up and give time back to the business for other value-added work."
"We have an annual license for this solution. The product is very expensive."
"In general, they changed their license model. Before you had to buy licenses for each component, and now they changed it so you can buy a license and use it for nearly all their applications."
"Cost-wise, compared with other tools, it is a great product."
"By using automation, it reduced about 75 percent of the time when compared to any other tool."
"Worksoft Capture 2.0 can help our customers to accelerate their automation development at least 40 percent faster than any other commercial tools available in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
832,891 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Worksoft Certify?
A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: January 2025.
832,891 professionals have used our research since 2012.