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

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is #2 ranked solution in top Performance Testing Tools and top Load Testing Tools. PeerSpot users give Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional an average rating of 8 out of 10. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is most commonly compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional vs Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 86% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 36% of all views.
What is Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?

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:

  • Drive quality across your enterprise.
  • Alleviate the challenges of managing many application types, testing tools, licenses, repositories, and systems while working toward unified results.

With Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional You Can:

  • Increase organizational efficiency through standardization of tools and resources.
  • Balance your priorities and improve the results delivered by your testing team.
  • Increase testing productivity.
  • Improve collaboration across application teams.
  • Gain the ability to outsource some or all the tactical work of load testing.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Features:

  • Intuitive and Easy to Use: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is intuitive, versatile, and easy to use, which makes it easy for testers to quickly learn the basics and apply them to their testing tasks, while engineers who are more experienced can utilize all the features for the most complex of scenarios.
  • Comprehensive Enterprise Coverage: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional provides support for multiple protocols such as HTML, WebSocket, AJAX, RDP, Database, Remote Terminal Emulators, Citrix, Java, .NET, Oracle and SAP.
  • Scripting Technologies: Reduce scripting time by 50% or more via Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional’s TruClient protocol, and automatic correlation, and correlate both front end (user experience) and back end (load) issues.
  • Extensive and Flexible Test Scenarios: The LoadRunner solution provides several valuable features that let you validate, enhance, and modify your tests. It gives you the ability to integrate external measurements to assess the impact on every application component, extend tests with success-failure checks, and emulate peak loads. You can also apply load on the go and change parameters for better flexibility in order to yield the most representative testing possible.
  • Realistic Network Conditions: Network virtualization capabilities help accurately simulate realistic conditions for an accurate analysis of both throughput and user response time. Realistic network conditions are predicted using location-aware analytics, transaction analysis and optimization.
  • Accurate Workloads with Low Overhead: Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional allows you to run high-scale tests with minimal hardware so that you can apply accurate workloads to any application.
  • Ongoing Testing Support: The Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional solution provides continuous testing support via built-in integrations across IDE, CI/CD, open source test automation, monitoring, and source code management tools.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Benefits:

  • Quickly deliver enterprise engineering capabilities and facilitate sharing of assets and collaboration.
  • Reduce complexity and increase utilization of infrastructure and human resources.
  • Get the big picture with cross-project reporting and individual project drill downs.
  • Increase collaboration and consistency with unified storage and access to all relevant assets.
  • Reduce costs with centralized management and built-in support of cloud-based load generation.
  • Analyze end-to-end performance, including topology, infrastructure-level, and advanced insights.
  • Incorporate application monitoring and user sentiment data to take a centralized approach to data collection and connect the dots.
  • Using powerful analytics and insights, gain visibility into the test status across the entire enterprise and performance trending information across multiple tests.

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 was previously known as Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner.

Buyer's Guide

Download the Performance Testing Tools Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: January 2022

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Video

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional pricing:
  • "It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive."
  • "This is not a cheap product."
  • "There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
  • "LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
  • Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Prashant Sarswat
    Head - Testing Centre of Excellence at NIIT Technologies Limited
    Real User
    Top 20
    Very good controller and a market leader, but not cost effective for small business
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
    • "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"

    What is our primary use case?

    In our organization, the solution is required for the testing of the performance of applications, response time, and the utilization of resources.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Initially, if you wanted to produce the load from different locations, you needed to have a physical machine there. But with time, the new features ensure that you can (if you want to) have one machine in the Pacific and one in North America. You can request and you can test those machines. You can connect and you can create loads from those locations. It's a very good feature. It's made things easier for us.

    What is most valuable?

    The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations. 

    The controller is the best feature, in my opinion.

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    The technical support aspect of the solution could be improved.

    Their current dashboard and their reporting is still following the earlier waterfall models. If they can add some things in the reporting, and update it so it is more modern, that would be great.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for five years. My organization continues to use it.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is a really stable tool. We haven't had issues with bugs or glitches. It hasn't crashed on us. We've been satisfied with the level of stability it provides.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is quite scalable. We've run tests with 20,000-30,000 users with no problem. You can add as much as you want, depending on the kind of license you hold. There may be certain licenses that offer limitations. However, with the right license, there sholdn't be issues with regard to scaling.

    We don't plan on scaling further ourselves. The plan for the future, right now, is to reduce the usage and include some freeware tools to supplement our needs. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is not as great as we expected them to be. The one or two times we have connected with them, they referred us to a model. They often say they will get back to us instead of helping us immediately. It's not very good.

    The last issue we had was related to some specific application. The tool was not able to identify the objects on the screen. We had questions, as they used some technology tool provider, and said they were testing at that time, and had mixed the technology on that screen, on the GUI. Loadrunner was not able to recognize it. They said they would come back to us, but we have not seen any answer from them since then. That was around a year back. We've had many questions since then as well.

    In the end, we had to solve it internally, but there is no solution from the tool company. Maybe in the next release it will be resolved.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I don't recall looking at other options. We simply decided to go with Loadrunner from the beginning.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup of the solution was very straightforward, as I recall. It wasn't too complex.

    The cloud has allowed for deployments to happen fairly fast. You need one URL and within 15-20 minutes you can have it installed on your local machine.

    What about the implementation team?

    Due to the fact that the solution has a pretty straightforward initial setup, we didn't need outside assistance. We didn't require the help of integrators or consultants. We handled everything in-house.

    What was our ROI?

    In terms of ROI, LoadRunner does everything. Web-based applications or free applications have a poor ROI in comparison. You just don't get the same quality.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I don't have any information about how much it costs to run the solution. I know it is expensive, but I don't handle the accounting, so I'm unsure how much our organization actually pays. I don't believe there are other costs beyond the standard licensing fee.

    There are different licence tiers. We have the maximum, so so don't have to deal with any limitations at any time.

    There's two types of users on the solution. One is the actual testers. In our organization, we have twenty people using this load. The others are virtual users. The licensing is dependent upon the virtual user and you are charged according to how many virtual users are using the application. Around twenty users are virtual in my organization.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    At the time we started with Loadrunner, it was the leader in the market. Now, of course, we have options. However, back then we did not have any competitors to look at or compare to.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're partners with Micro Focus.

    I'd advise other organizations, if cost is not a problem, to consider LoadRunner, as it is the best product on the market. However, it's not cost-effective for a small company. It's much more suited for enterprises. Smaller companies should look at other options. 

    It's a good solution within the market, but it is costly in this region. It is very high. For some it might not make sense when the cost is so high and the support is somewhat lacking.

    From an ease of use, installation, deployment, and multi-use tool perspective, I'd rank the solution definitely at an eight or nine out of ten. However, once you include the cost, I'd reduce the ranking to seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Performance Engineer with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Has a good pedigree but there are strong contenders out there
    Pros and Cons
    • "It has good protocol coverage."
    • "The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."

    What is our primary use case?

    All of our installations are on-premises at the moment.  

    What is most valuable?

    One of the most valuable features to me is that LoadRunner is familiar. I have worked with it for so long that I know where everything is and I know how it is supposed to work.  

    But focusing on actual program features, all I can say is it has good protocol coverage.  

    What needs improvement?

    I have not had a really good look at the newest versions of LoadRunner. The problem I have always had with LoadRunner — and even more so with Performance Center — is that it is not very good with agile delivery and it is very difficult to integrate. Software engineers who have been working in agile delivery have been saying this for some time, and have been having success with alternatives.

    Also, Performance Center has historically been quite unreliable and difficult. It tends to fail at collation. I think that is because of the Load Runner architecture that Performance Center inherited. Everything waits until the end of a test to collate and it does not always work out well. I know that Micro Focus has done something about that in the new version. But that is the worst thing that happens: with LoadRunner or Performance Center you run a big critical test and you can't get the results.  

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have personally been using LoadRunner and Performance Center for 20 years. I think it's been the backbone of performance testing for 20+ years and must be given credit for helping establish the discipline.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability has been an issue. It has really been a big problem for us with Performance Center in particular. Crashing or exiting during collation is not acceptable.   

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have not been totally satisfied with the scalability. We tend to have more issues with Performance Center. The more you try to grow use with it on-prem, the more headaches you have. Often working with LoadRunner and smaller environments is more reliable. We believe the SaaS solution might be better because you have got centralized management.  

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Most of my experience is in the early days of Mercury, they were brilliant. They were really good and helped resolve issues. I have not been using them recently.  

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Right now we use LoadRunner and Performance Center depending on what we believe are best practices for different situations. We are considering evaluating other options as well, including LoadRunner SaaS.

    How was the initial setup?

    The two Micro Focus products are interesting to compare. LoadRunner is very easy to set up. Performance Center needs an expert. I can install LoadRunner in minutes by myself. To do the installation properly with Performance Center needs a specialist and takes weeks.  

    Plenty of people seem to have installed Performance Center in a couple of days, but when they use it they usually have problems. You really need to do it properly. I do plan to have a look at the newer versions, and maybe those implementations will be smoother.  

    What other advice do I have?

    Advice that I would give people considering LoadRunner is that I would recommend exploring other tools first or at least in comparison. There are lots of really good open-source or even just cheaper alternatives. Depending on your use case, the other options might be much better. LoadRunner has broad protocol coverage. Sometimes you have got no choice but to go with a solution because of what it can do. But I think the days of LoadRunner being the only solution out there for this kind of testing have gone. There are some very good competitors now and where the competitor can do the job, you will save money.  

    On the scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional as about a six. I have not taken a good look at the latest version, but my current experience with the version of the product we use has not been great.  

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Apache, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: January 2022.
    563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Test Automation, DevOps & Performance Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Support many different protocols, but integration with the CICD pipeline should be easier
    Pros and Cons
    • "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."
    • "The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this product to test our web application that is used for internet banking.

    What is most valuable?

    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. This means that it is very scalable.

    What needs improvement?

    I would like to see easier integration with our CICD pipeline.

    The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight.

    I would like to see a browser extension where we can start the development. This would be helpful because right now, this solution is good for UTM integration and performance testing, but if we want to scale then it is difficult.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have only been using LoadRunner Professional for a short time because I just joined the company, and I used to work with open-source technology.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have six or seven people using this product.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    As we have just begun using it, we have note let had to contact support.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is pretty easy. This product is Java-based and you just have to add the independent libraries and dependencies. It is more of a client-server based architecture

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    This is not a cheap product.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I have primarily used JMeter, which is open-source and free to use.

    I have also used Silk Performer, although that was a long way back.

    The suitability of one solution over another is very dependant on the use case. When it comes to performance testing, it is very specific to the use case. It depends on your goal and what you want to do.

    What other advice do I have?

    These days, testing is not a separate activity. It's more about how fast you can quickly deliver and time to market. This is a product that I can recommend, although it depends on the use case. The first question has to be one of budget because LoadRunner is not cheap. Things differ from company to company. At the same time, not all of the free tools can perform all of the functions. It is based on requirements.

    If they're a small company, such as a startup e-commerce company, then they might be better off implementing an open-source product.

    I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Regional Head Customer Experience at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Supports multiple protocols, easy to install and use, and handles large workloads
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are it using the solution mainly for the REST-based API.

    What is most valuable?

    It is quite a good tool. It supports a medical protocol which we tried to explore in other products, but none of them had. It is very difficult to get data tool support in these solutions but LoadRunner does support them, it is a big advantage. Overall, It is pretty simple, easy to use.

    What needs improvement?

    My team members predominately used the product to do development but I don't think it needs anything in a way of improvements.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using the solution for over two years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We didn't see any challenge with this product at all.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We found the support to be good. Whenever there is an issue with anything, within 24-hours we get an answer. If we want someone from their team to look into an issue, they will log it, analyze it and get back to us.

    How was the initial setup?

    The installation took around 20 to 30 minutes.

    What about the implementation team?

    We did the installation and deployment of the product ourselves. It's simple and pretty easy. We were using the LRP, we did not need any technical guidance for anything. We simply installed the configuration, then a few clicks, and we were done.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    There is a licensing cost that is expensive. There is also the Enterprise version of the software which allows other features that the Professional does not, such as, license sharing.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    I rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Arif Ahmed
    Sr. QA Automation Specialist at Department of Transportation NYC
    Real User
    Top 5
    Correlation and parameterization are the key valuable features for us
    Pros and Cons
    • "Paramterization and correlation are important features."
    • "Licensing costs could be reduced."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use the solution for client service applications, mostly web-based applications. There are a lot of service conversions needed in terms of Apple to Apple talking or using with a protocol. If you need what they're offering then I think LoadRunner is a good tool. And it's from HP. Primary use cases are creating code-based operations for the latest updates, and API calls if we are in corporate. I'm a QA leader and we are customers of Micro Focus LoadRunner. 

    What is most valuable?

    I think correlation is one of the important features. Correlation, parameterization, those kind of features make things easier.

    What needs improvement?

    It's a very expensive tool so I think licensing costs could be reduced. I think their monitoring services in real time could be improved and made more user friendly. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for nearly 15 years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This is a stable product - I've dealt with it over the past 15 years and it's stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It's a scalable product in terms of it's running or technology wise. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Their tech support is pretty good. They try to document things and they are organized. I would say I've had good experience with them. 

    How was the initial setup?

    This is a heavy-duty tool, so it's not a one-click installation. But I think it's comparatively easier with the documentation they provide.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would suggest that if you have a site that needs to be used by a lot of people or if it's for enterprise applications where consumption is high, then it's a good tool. Otherwise, if there are fewer users or not a lot of load, then I would say that other tools might be handy. If you require performance-oriented applications, then it's a good tool. 

    I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Senior Architect at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Easy to use, good protocols, and good reporting
    Pros and Cons
    • "The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
    • "The debugging capability should be improved."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have several use cases for this solution. One of them is an automobile website for a huge dealership and we are doing load testing for them. We have projects in the hospitality industry, like hotel bookings. Our projects involve both API testing as well as browser-based load testing.

    What is most valuable?

    The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports.

    The auto-correlation is much better than the different protocols that it supports.

    LoadRunner is easy to use.

    What needs improvement?

    The debugging capability is difficult to use and should be improved. This is one area where some of the other products we use are better.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using LoadRunner for five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We use LoadRunner on a daily basis and it is good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is easier to scale when you have the online, cloud option.

    We probably have about 200 users and in the future, we may increase our usage.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We have been in touch with technical support but not very often. They were helpful when we did contact them.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We have used multiple testing tools like Visual Studio and NeoLoad. We have all of these as options. LoadRunner is easier to use and has support for better protocols.

    How was the initial setup?

    Five to six engineers are required to maintain this solution.

    What about the implementation team?

    Our in-house team deployed this solution.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    NeoLoad was one of the options that we considered, but we ultimately went with LoadRunner.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Senior Load & Performance Test Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Integrates well with UC and the support is helpful
    Pros and Cons
    • "What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
    • "I would like to see better-licensing costs."

    What is most valuable?

    What we like the most is that it integrates with UC. We use UC for our front-end user experience. It's a more realistic user experience. 

    We use the script from the user experience and we use the action times from the UC.

    What needs improvement?

    If they were able to, I would say that the scalability could be improved. If the costs were not as expensive to upgrade, then we would scale it more.

    The initial setup could be simplified.

    I would like to see better licensing costs. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with this solution for ten years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's a stable solution. In the ten years that we have been using it, I have only had an issue once.  We had an issue with the protocol where it didn't support the job. We contacted support.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It's a scalable solution but I think that the Enterprise version is more scalable and more manageable.

    It's fine for us, as we only have a few projects a year. On a larger scale, Enterprise would be better than the Professional edition.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    When I had contacted technical support they very helpful.

    How was the initial setup?

    Previous versions were easy to install but we struggled with the LoadRunner Enterprise to get it to work. It was a bit challenging.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product.

    What other advice do I have?

    I like using LoadRunner and I recommend it.

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Performance Testing Tools Report and find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Apache, Tricentis, and more!