"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."
"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
Earn 20 points
LoadRunner is the Micro Focus industry-standard software solution for application performance and load testing. LoadRunner stresses your entire system to isolate and identify potential client, network, and server bottlenecks, supporting performance testing of new technologies together with your existing, legacy applications.
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Will Enable You To:
With Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional You Can:
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Features:
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Benefits:
Reviews from Real Users:
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations.” - Head, Testing Centre of Excellence at NIIT Technologies Limited
"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others.” - Test Automation, DevOps & Performance Engineering at a financial services firm
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable.” - Regional Head Customer Experience at a financial services firm
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports.” - Senior Architect at a computer software company
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Silk Test is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is rated 7.4, while Silk Test is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional writes "Very good controller and a market leader, but not cost effective for small business". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Test writes "An easy to use interface with a recording feature that our business users are happy with". Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud and IBM Rational Performance Tester, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Tosca and Micro Focus UFT Developer.
We monitor all Performance Testing Tools 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.