OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. ReadyAPI

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
LoadRunner Professional
Score 8.7 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
OpenText UFT Digital Lab
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Formerly from Micro Focus, a centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.N/A
ReadyAPI
Score 6.3 out of 10
N/A
ReadyAPI (formerly SoapUI Pro, LoadUI Pro, and ServiceV Pro) is a REST and SOAP API functional testing tool that enables software developers, QA engineers, and manual testers to work together to create, maintain, and execute complex end-to-end API tests in their CI/CD pipelines without needing to code.N/A
Pricing
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Free Trial
NoNoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Considered Multiple Products
LoadRunner Professional

No answer on this topic

OpenText UFT Digital Lab
Chose OpenText UFT Digital Lab
We selected UFT Mobile mainly for its easy tie-in to our existing automation and other tools we use from Micro Focus. We did briefly look at some other options, but the ability to instantly tie in, and also allow future changes (if we desired) like Appium.
ReadyAPI

No answer on this topic

Features
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
8.4
6 Ratings
1% below category average
OpenText UFT Digital Lab
-
Ratings
ReadyAPI
-
Ratings
End to end performance management9.06 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated performance data10.06 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility9.06 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Real time monitoring6.15 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection8.05 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(7 ratings)
9.0
(2 ratings)
7.0
(65 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
7.3
(18 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.9
(3 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
3.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalOpenText UFT Digital LabReadyAPI
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
OpenText
UFT mobile works really well if/when you need physical devices under your management. Managing physical devices in any setup is an interesting undertaking due to the various considerations per device. There are really nice best practices, for example using managed USB switches like the one from Cambrionix, that can help make for a really good experience. For us, we only have 1 application at this time that has frequent updates/releases. We are able to test out these with confidence using our suite of real/on-campus devices managed and made available by the UFT Mobile product.
Read full review
SmartBear
As stated, we do a LOT of API testing, the swaggerhub import makes it easy to add APIs. This is very well-suited, as well as easy management of the steps/cases/suites inside of ReadyAPI. The one thing I do wish ReadyAPI was better suited for is changes to data, we have a lot of test cases in ReadyAPI and if we make a change to how the backend data is structured, one-by-one adjustments need to be made to the steps. Less appropriate, UI testing.
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
OpenText
  • Remote access to real devices within your organization network as compared to public devices library offering, where their is a risk of exposing pre-production builds outside the organization.
  • "Factory built like" integration with HP ALM, HP Sprinter, HP UFT and HP Network Virtualization.
  • Ability to mimic real world conditions in a controlled environment in the devices of your choice.
  • Removed the guess work out of using emulators
  • Able to extend automation to mobile testing using HP UFT.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Ease of use (ability to automatically import API definitions, Jenkins integration for running in the pipeline).
  • Detailed test reports (allow to easily identify weak spots during both functional and performance testing).
  • One platform for all tests (allows to closely couple and reuse existent tests).
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
OpenText
  • Most of our problems are with the lengthy onboarding process with iOS devices.
  • Occasionally Android devices will disconnect themselves.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Needs good documentation
  • Need to improve the performance of the tool
  • Setup is very complex and for such [a] commercial tool, it should easy and straightforward
  • Tool says it supports security testing but in reality, it is not at an extensive level.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
The tool continues to meet our expectations and has shown that they are continually evolving the product with new features that benefit us. The most recent new feature was the auto-signing/packaging of iOS apps from the server to allow native interaction of features like biometrics. Prior this was a lengthy exercise.
Read full review
SmartBear
The only reason this isn't a '10' is because of the cost. This product is definitely meant for organizations who are serious about making sure they invest in the full ecosystem of API design, development, maintenance. But there is a significant cost associated with this investment. and because of this cost (and the non-tangible output for executives), it is a difficult line-item to justify in this post-pandemic environment.
Read full review
Usability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
SoapUI allows us to combine multiple tests and adhere
to the sequence that they need to run in order to complete successfully.
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
Soap UI has managed to continuously build on it's solid foundation and keep improving by each release. It is by far the most dependable and accurate testing tool out there of its kind. Available via connecting to VM's created as SoapUI test machines give access to it anytime, anywhere practically.
Read full review
Performance
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing.
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
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
To be honest, we didnt had much issues with the support, as there is already plenty of online communities available for help. But if ever there were some minor issues with the membership or the certificates, the tech support was always quick and efficient enough to resolve the issue ASAP
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
no very easy but lacks documentation
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
OpenText
HP Mobile Center stacks well against solutions like Mobile Labs Device Connect, Perfecto Mobile and Device Anywhere. Its native integration with HP ALM and HP UFT makes it a clear choice for team already using those solutions. HP Mobile Center also provides extension to Amazon Device Library.
Read full review
SmartBear
ReadyAPI provides intuitive GUI capabilities compared to their own open source product. When compared to Postman, ReadyAPI also supports SOAP based services, which is a saver especially when integrating with legacy or other third party systems.
Read full review
Scalability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very
good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing. However, I have read that added monitoring tools have been added, which if so the 7 could possibly go to a 8 or 9.
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
OpenText
  • Efficient use of the devices. Reduced the idle time.
  • Better control over access and user management. Testing within our controlled environments.
  • Better control of device matrix.
  • Faster testing cycles. Early design bugs to development teams. Real devices means, less guess work.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Very quick regression testing, hence having the testing results very soon, even the same day of deployment
  • for same above reason, it can save money for corporation (so no tedious, costly and erroneous manual testings)
  • The test reports are compatible with TestNG, so the corporation can integrate the reports in our Autamation frameworks such as Allure or Jira Zephyr
Read full review
ScreenShots