We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and RadView WebLOAD 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 most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The solution can scale."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the Vuser license; it allows us to reduce the cost as per requirement."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols."
"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"
"The solution is easy to use."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 39 reviews while RadView WebLOAD is ranked 11th in Performance Testing Tools with 9 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is rated 8.2, while RadView WebLOAD is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud writes "Supports multiple protocols and helps to ensure that our applications are stable at any given point". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RadView WebLOAD writes "IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated". OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and Apache JMeter, whereas RadView WebLOAD is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, BlazeMeter and k6 Open Source. See our OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. RadView WebLOAD 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.