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

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs ReadyAPI Performance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
7
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 Professional is 11.7%, down from 15.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Performance is 1.1%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load 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.
Kiran Patil - PeerSpot reviewer
A great solution to validate web services, is stable, and requires minimal people for deployment
Compared to SoapUI, the ReadyAPI automation is very useful for us because ReadyAPI is the new version of SoapUI. I know that this tool is very helpful for us to find the defects and to run the web services accordingly. We get what we are expecting with the solution. ReadyAPI commissioner has fulfilled all our requirements. I don't believe there are any drawbacks at the moment. ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface. This will save time during the execution phase before we deploy it to the user interface.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"We can scale."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"We find the product to be scalable."
 

Cons

"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"It is very slow sometimes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"Pricing depends on our choices because it depends on what type of protocol we are getting, what type of licensing we are getting, and what kind of relationships we have with HP and Micro Focus."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"The pricing model and the software licensing model could be better."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"This solution operates on a licence basis and the usage and cost varies according to the use case. It is more expensive if you include access to the learning center. On average it costs approximately 800 Euros."
"ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable."
"We find the cost to be affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 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
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
 

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 Performance?
It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI Performance?
The solution’s interface could be improved.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
LoadUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Mercedes-Benz, Adobe, Hilton Hotels, The Home Depot
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. ReadyAPI Performance and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.