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

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Spirent Avalanche 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 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)
Spirent Avalanche
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Spirent Avalanche is 0.8%, down from 0.9% 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.
reviewer1153692 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality traffic testing and is reasonably priced
I find network traffic testing the most valuable feature The solution could improve by increasing the Gbps speeds and by having better support for storage. I have been using the solution for one and a half years. The price of the solution is reasonable. I rate Spirent Avalanche a nine out of…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are the separate module for scripting, execution analysis, and integration with a lot of new things pipeline areas. They keep updating their releases. Recently, they have released different versions, such as the professional and enterprise. They're coming up with new features which are good."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"I find network traffic testing the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"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."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"The solution could improve by increasing the Gbps speeds and by having better support for storage."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"The pricing model and the software licensing model could be better."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
839,319 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
24%
Computer Software Company
22%
Media Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 '...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
Avalanche
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
ditno
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: February 2025.
839,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.