Experitest vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Experitest
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Experitest is a mobile and web app performance testing solution, allowing users to simulate different servers, measure transaction duration, and speed index. Understand website and web application response from client to server to UI render. Analyze performance across time, versions, and tests.N/A
LoadRunner Professional
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
A solution simplifies performance load testing for colocated teams. With project-based capabilities, so teams can quickly identify abnormal application behavior.N/A
Pricing
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ExperitestLoadRunner Professional
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
Experitest
-
Ratings
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
8.4
6 Ratings
0% below category average
End to end performance management00 Ratings9.06 Ratings
Integrated performance data00 Ratings10.06 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility00 Ratings9.06 Ratings
Real time monitoring00 Ratings6.15 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection00 Ratings8.05 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Likelihood to Recommend
8.5
(3 ratings)
9.0
(7 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
3.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
ExperitestOpenText LoadRunner Professional
Likelihood to Recommend
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
Experitest is among the best when comes to Mobile QA automation needs and it has come a long way since I started using 5 years ago. I would love see Experitest growing from mobile and web QA to E2E test automation player.
Read full review
OpenText
Micro Focus LoadRunner and its suite of tools, specifically VuGen works wonderfully for us for all web, http/https and web service calls. We've been able to build tests for near any scenario we need with relative ease. As long as we have crafted up requirements for our scenarios / scripts to managed scope, we've had high success working with scripting and data driving. Our main tests are web service calls - typically chained together to form a full scenario with transactions measuring the journey or a similar (measure along the way) journey through a browser. For web services we will use VuGen and browser we've shifted to Tru Client I have had little-to-no experience scripting against a thick client where a ui-driven test would be required. I know its possible but quite costly due to the need to run the actual desktop client to drive tests. We've been fortunate enough to leverage http calls to represent client traffic.
Read full review
Pros
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
  • Wide range of mobile devices and Tablets
  • Wide range of Browsers
  • Responsiveness of the platform.
  • Test Automation
Read full review
OpenText
  • It can simulate multiple users at the same time and help understand the performance.
  • It can generate excellent reports and give insights into application performance.
  • It is a fast tool and does not take time to perform its functions.
Read full review
Cons
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
  • Expanding from Mobile QA to kiosks, wearables testing.
  • Complicated licensing system.
  • I somehow feel the older model of cloud option was better than current SaaS model.
Read full review
OpenText
  • HP LoadRunner with new patches and releases sometimes makes no longer support older version of various protocols like Citrix, which makes the task time-consuming when using older versions of LoadRunner for some of the cases. So it should support older version as well while upgrading.
  • Configuring HP LoadRunner over the firewall involves lots of configuration and may be troublesome. So, there should be a script (power shell script for Windows or shell script for Linux users) to make it easy to use and with less pain.
  • I would like to see the RunTime Viewer of Vugen in HPLoadRunner based on the browser I selected in the run-time configuration to make it feel more realistic as a real user.
  • Licensing cost is very high when we need to perform a test on application for a specific group of users.
Read full review
Usability
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
Extremely good UI and gives a solid feeling when using the platform. We do not have to spend a lot of time training the other resources as the UI is so intuitive and self explanatory.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
Support is one of the key areas in this field and Experitest excels in that. I have some very good friends over there and they are always ready to help.
Read full review
OpenText
Customer service is not that great. It's difficult to get hold of someone if an issue is supposed to be addressed on an urgent basis. No online chat service readily available.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
ExperiTest provides similar capabilities but the tools differentiates in providing a scriptless automation platform alongside. Also provides a very good integration with wide variety of Automation frameworks.
Read full review
OpenText
HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
  • Provided a considerable saving in procuring devices across different delivery centers
  • Extremely fast platform.
Read full review
OpenText
  • The scripts created with traditional web/http protocol are not robust thus re-scripting is required after most every code drop. Troubleshooting and fixing the issue takes more time therefore in most cases we do re-scripting to keep it simple and save time.
  • In ideal world you would rather spend more time doing testing than scripting in that case mostly you could use an Ajax TruClient protocol. This type of script will only fail when an object in the application is removed or changed completely. This way of scripting will save you more time and helps you maintain the scripts with less re-work effort on a release basis. On the long run you will have a better ROI when you use Ajax TruClient protocol for scripting.
Read full review
ScreenShots