We performed a comparison between Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise and Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional comes out on top in this comparison. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is a mature and feature-rich solution with a proven ROI, whereas Enterprise users report being dissatisfied with the product’s ROI.
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good."
"Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration allows for quick comparison of monitoring and performance results, a feature I highly appreciate."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"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."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"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."
"The capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"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 be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"LoadRunner experiences high resource utilization. Even though we have machines with higher configurations, I've observed this behavior. Heavy traffic recording results in the tool hanging. So heavy traffic recording makes the tool slow."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". 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". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter, IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.