We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"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 number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a user-friendly solution."
"Its initial setup process is easy."
"The tool has highly detailed debugging features."
"Visual Studio is highly powerful. It's probably the best software development tool on the market."
"The most valuable features are the SSIS reports, the deployment models, and the ability to interact with other Microsoft tools."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"I was satisfied with the support given by customer service."
"It is a very common and strong product. A lot of support is available for this product."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"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 product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"Visual Studio Test Professional could improve by having better integration with external databases."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"It is hard to learn, and you need to invest time to understand it."
"Sometimes Visual Studio is slow. It uses a lot of resources like memory and processing power. You should optimize the performance by only installing what you need on your machine. Don't install unnecessary things that will slow your machine."
"The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT Developer.
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.