We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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."We like that Apache JMeter has different features and different plugins and that they are free of charge."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's very easy to install, and it's very easy to code and develop the script."
"This solution is easier to use than any other tool in the market; there is not even a requirement to learn a lot of scripting in order to use it."
"We use Apache JMeter for load testing, where we provide the throughput time."
"It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is being able to launch many requests and scheduling simulating human interactions with the application."
"We really appreciate that the solution comes with a live community, which continuously provided plugins and support protocols."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is easy to use and has flexibility that allows it to be used on a variety of applications."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"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."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"You really need a technical team in order to really utilize the product."
"There is some work to be done with the integration."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues."
"The solution needs to improve reporting. Currently, there is not enough automation involved with the feature. For example, there should be an automatic way of saving reports."
"JMeter's reporting is extremely rudimentary. The fundamental reporting mechanisms need to be drastically improved. It doesn't utilize an automatic session management mechanism or methods other tools use like parsing cookies and variables. Everything needs to be done manually. There's no automation."
"The plug-ins make the reports heavy and they have to be run in non-GUI mode."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". 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". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our Apache JMeter vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise 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.
