OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs. ReadyAPI vs. Visual Studio Test Professional

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 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
Visual Studio Test Professional
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
An add-on for the Visual Studio IDE, Visual Studio Test Professional subscription helps teams drive quality and speed. It includes test case management and collaboration features that streamline quality control and support continuous delivery.
$2,169
for the first year (renews at $869)
Pricing
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Free Trial
NoYesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Considered Multiple Products
LoadRunner Professional

No answer on this topic

ReadyAPI

No answer on this topic

Visual Studio Test Professional
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
I believe the thing that makes Visual Studio a solid choice is the integration with Azure and Microsoft. Apart from that, there are several open-source software available which pretty much do the same on the same scale as well.
Features
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
8.4
6 Ratings
1% below category average
ReadyAPI
-
Ratings
Visual Studio Test Professional
-
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 ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
Selenium
Selenium
Score 8.3 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 8.4 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(7 ratings)
7.0
(65 ratings)
7.0
(15 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(18 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
9.9
(3 ratings)
7.0
(10 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
3.0
(1 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
8.5
(10 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText LoadRunner ProfessionalReadyAPIVisual Studio Test Professional
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
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
Microsoft
It would be well suited if we used it with Azure DevOps as we can effortlessly integrate the test cases and even stories or tasks to stay on track with our work. Those test cases can even be reused across multiple projects. Using any other third-party tools, such as Jira, can be less appropriate, as it's not a Microsoft tool, and its capabilities will be limited.
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
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
Microsoft
  • Availability of the desktop client or the web interface. The web interface being the favorite and providing a better experience.
  • It enables you to write unit tests with so much ease.
  • Allows the recording and repeating of manual tests
  • It can be set up for collaboration.
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
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
Microsoft
  • The user community of the Visual Studio Test product is weak. For instant problems with this product, it is necessary to quickly reach the source of the error.
  • Licence fees need to be more reasonable. License prices need to be reduced so that they can easily compete with free testing tools.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
No answers on this topic
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
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
Microsoft
It is very usable if you are familiar with Visual Studio to begin with. If you are new to the interface, it can be a long ramp up period for Testers not used to the GUI. There is always the web option which seems to be more intuitive for many Testers.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
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
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Performance
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
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
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
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
Microsoft
Visual Studio Test Professional is backed up by the full support of the Microsoft Corporation. That means twenty-four/seven customer support by quality, highly-trained professionals who understand every possible issue that you have experienced before. They are nice, efficient, and highly professional. I recommend them.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
SmartBear
no very easy but lacks documentation
Read full review
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
OpenText
HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.
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
Microsoft
The visual Studio Test tool is faster than other tools. Since the development and testing processes are in one tool, it is more profitable in terms of cost. It is more inconvenient to write a test case in DevOps.
Read full review
Scalability
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
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
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
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
Microsoft
  • One of the positive ROIs of Visual Studios is the fact that it makes producing our work at a quick rate, things like Intellisense make our work get produced at a much higher rate which is good for our return of investment.
  • Testing by the developers has increased by 23%, we now take the time to actually test our product before we send it to our QA people.
  • I am not aware of any negative ROI aspects to our company that have been found.
Read full review
ScreenShots