We performed a comparison between Cavisson NetStorm and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"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."
"Our main use case for the product was load and stress testing. It helped us put the system under stress by injecting in multiple users, such as 5,000 users."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 19th in Load Testing Tools while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.4, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter. See our Cavisson NetStorm vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.