We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center vs Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Micro Focus and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: January 2022.
563,327 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool.""Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs""It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing.""I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions.""What they do best is test management. That's their strong point.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable.""You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product.""Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros →

"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly.""The most valuable part of the product is the way you can scale the basic testing easily.""We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with.""One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this.""I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting.""The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter.""This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."

More Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Pros →

Cons
"When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects.""If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great.""The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall.""If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good""ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers.""It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it.""HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist.""Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons →

"It's not that popular on the cloud.""The reporting has room for improvement.""The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools.""Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled.""It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us.""The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved.""Micro Focus needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."

More Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Compared to the market, the price is high."
  • "Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
  • "It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
  • "Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."
  • "The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
  • "Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
  • "I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
  • "Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
  • More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
  • "They have a much more practical pricing model now."
  • "I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
  • More Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    563,327 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports… more »
    Top Answer: 
    I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.
    Top Answer: 
    In terms of places for improvement, Micro Focus is an expensive tool. We see nowadays that there are other products coming, and Micro Focus is more expensive and there are lots of license costs. Lots… more »
    Top Answer: 
    We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The contract that we had with Micro Focus was a bit complex, but now it's much simpler. As a customer, I have clarity about it. That is something that helps us to serve the business better.
    Top Answer: 
    It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    16,153
    Comparisons
    9,832
    Reviews
    28
    Average Words per Review
    1,025
    Rating
    7.3
    Views
    5,149
    Comparisons
    3,876
    Reviews
    6
    Average Words per Review
    962
    Rating
    7.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
    Learn More
    Overview

    Micro Focus ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass to govern software quality and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes. Designed for complex multi-application environments, organizations can achieve high efficiency in their testing and measure quality with a requirements-driven and risk-based testing approach. Advanced reporting provides a complete view across all releases to gain new insights and make informed decisions. With numerous deployment options, open integrations with common tools and strong data controls, ALM/Quality Center is a perfect choice for enterprises that need to enforce standards, ensure compliance and adapt to changing tools.

    Learn more:

    Micro Focus Performance Center is a global cross-enterprise performance testing tool which enables you to manage multiple, concurrent performance testing projects across different geographic locations without any need to travel between the locations. Performance Center administers all your internal performance testing needs. With Performance Center, you manage all aspects of large-scale performance testing projects, including resource allocation and scheduling, from a centralized location accessible through the Web. Performance Center helps streamline the testing process, reduce resource costs, and increase operating efficiency.

    Offer
    Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
    Learn more about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise
    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Insurance Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company31%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Government7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Insurance Company14%
    Retailer14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company32%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise73%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise78%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise79%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Micro Focus and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: January 2022.
    563,327 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 29 reviews while Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.4, while Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Full geographical coverage, integrates well with monitoring tools, granular project inspection capabilities". Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Rally Software, whereas Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter.

    We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.