OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. Selenium

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
LoadRunner Professional
Score 8.5 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
Selenium
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Selenium is open source software for browser automation, primarily used for functional, load, or performance testing of applications.N/A
Pricing
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
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
Features
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
8.4
6 Ratings
0% below category average
Selenium
-
Ratings
End to end performance management9.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated performance data10.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.06 Ratings00 Ratings
Real time monitoring6.15 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.3 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(7 ratings)
9.2
(55 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.2
(6 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.8
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
3.0
(1 ratings)
8.3
(11 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalSelenium
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Open Source
When you have to test the UI and how it behaves when certain actions are performed, you need something that can automate the browsers. This is where Selenium comes to the rescue. If you have to test APIs and not the frontend (UI), I would recommend going with other libraries that support HTTP Requests. Selenium is good only when you have no choice but to run the steps on a browser.
Read full review
Pros
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
Open Source
  • For any web based UI automation, Selenium is the best tool out there to automate your tests.
  • It supports multiple coding languages like Java, Python, Ruby, C# etc.. to choose from.
  • There is a huge community of users and can get many answers on StackOverFlow.
  • It has lot of other plugins to make your tests even more efficient.
Read full review
Cons
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
Open Source
  • Selenium is pretty user-friendly but sometimes tests tend to flake out. I'd say roughly one out of twenty tests yields a false positive.
  • Selenium software cannot read images. This is a minor negative because a free plug-in is available from alternate sources.
  • Slowness may be a minor factor with Selenium, though this is an issue with basically any testing software since waiting on a site to execute JavaScript requires the browser to wait for a particular action.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
We love this product mainly because of its high customization abilities and the ease of use. Moreover, its free and can be learned easily through online communities and videos. The tests are more consistent and reliable as compared to Manual tests. It has enabled us to test a large number of features all in one go, which would have impossible through manual tests. The reports generated at the end of the tests are really helpful for the QA and the development teams to get a fair view of the application.
Read full review
Usability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
As I mentioned earlier, the reason I use Selenium is because there is a fairly widespread community of users, and user support services are at a good level. because the application is open source, it works on many platforms (Windows, Linux, IOS) without any problems. In addition, it gives us a lot of options for writing functional tests. For errors that we receive through the application, we can easily find the reasons for errors in the forums.
Read full review
Support Rating
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
Open Source
Selenium does not have technical support available easily. You have to go through forums to get the information you need. However, there are excellent forums out there that make it easy to troubleshoot. The open-source flexibility makes it difficult to have dedicated support.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
We did everything we needed to use it. Now we can execute our tests on different operational systems and browsers running few tests simultaneously. We also implemented Appium framework to execute our tests on mobile devices, such as iPhones, iPads, Android phones and tablets. We use SauceLabs for our test execution and Jenkins for continuous integration.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
OpenText
HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.
Read full review
Open Source
At the time of adoption, there were not many other alternatives that were even close to being competitive when it comes to browser testing. As far as I know now to this day, there is still little competition to Selenium for what it does. Any other browser-based testing still utilises Selenium to interact with the browser.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
Open Source
  • There hasn’t been a downside to using it yet other than we’ve got to update the programs we create for each change.
  • This has saved us hundreds of hours of manpower by allowing our automation engineer to rapid fire tests.
  • We are able to screenshot and save entire sites before and after launch with a program the automation engineer created
  • We can compare large volumes of data against data in excel docs with a program created using Selenium
Read full review
ScreenShots