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

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 5, 2025

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 Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (4th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.9%, down from 14.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
SandeepSingh9 - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper
One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"It is actually a very good tool because it will support almost all, if not all, industry-standard protocols, and it is also equipped with very nice reporting capabilities, which is why I like it."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users."
"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."
"The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git."
 

Cons

"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"There are lots of options within the solution, however they are not upfront or user-friendly."
"Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful."
"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"ReadyAPI could improve by having dynamic validation information."
"Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's pricing is reasonable."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"The pricing model and the software licensing model could be better."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."
"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
"The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year."
"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."
"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."
"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
"The solution is dynamically priced so you only pay for what you use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
In native teams and cloud environments, there is room for improvement. I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor. These are more so points from my wishlis...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.