We performed a comparison between Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Performance Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."
"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."
"The solution is very stable."
"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."
"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"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."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"The test clip should be more user-friendly."
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."
"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."
"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."
"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."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"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 technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai CloudTest is ranked 12th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Akamai CloudTest is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Akamai CloudTest writes "Is easy to use and quick to setup, and does not require much resource capacity for medium instances". 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". Akamai CloudTest is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad and k6 Open Source, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and Eggplant Performance. See our Akamai CloudTest 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.