Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th)
Tricentis Tosca
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (1st), Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (1st), Test Automation Tools (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features
The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"The solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."
"Compared to other tools we have been looking at, you don't have to be a programmer to operate it, though it helps. It also a product that can be used by business people."
"The solution can be deployed in DevOps and ERP environments like Oracle Fusion. It accelerates testing with the libraries. The product incorporates libraries and is more sensitive to the scans."
"The model-based scriptless automation is the most valuable feature because it needs less maintenance as compared to script-based automation."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"Tosca is a low-code no-code automation tool, allowing direct automation and reusability of test cases."
 

Cons

"The debugging capability should be improved."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"Sometimes when we were migrating from one version to another, some of our scripts started failing."
"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."
"The reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
"Parallel execution is not yet implemented for Tosca. This means you can't execute the same test case on multiple machines remotely."
"I have found that some of the functions could be missed in the solution for new users. They are not obviously present."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."
"The document object model or some aspects of it has a bit of a learning curve."
"Tosca's reporting features could be better. Tricentis had a reporting tool called Analytics, but it didn't function properly after they reworked it. After that, they tried a new approach with key-tracing, and that didn't work."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is an annual license required to use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. There are not any additional costs other than the licensing fees to use it."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's pricing is reasonable."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"Pricing depends on our choices because it depends on what type of protocol we are getting, what type of licensing we are getting, and what kind of relationships we have with HP and Micro Focus."
"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"The tool is expensive. It has become overpriced, especially after Tricentis Tosca grew as a company. Initially, we bought a license with an annual support fee, which wasn't too expensive. However, they changed the model, and now we have to purchase a license yearly, which has become quite costly."
"The price of Tricentis Tosca is approximately Є10,000 for one license. However, it used to be much cheaper, but they changed their license structure. It used to be a structure where if you bought a license you would receive one year of free support and maintenance. Now they only have a yearly license, and that is expensive."
"The price of the tool is a problem for a lot of Brazilian clients or Latino clients, as it is expensive. Where I work, if one is low price and ten is high price, I rate the tool's price as a ten out of ten."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. It is on the higher side."
"Although the product is slightly more expensive than tools, its automation capabilities and reduced scripting needs justify the cost."
"My understanding is that it's an expensive product, although I don't know the specifics with regards to pricing."
"Tosca is expensive. I don't see small and medium customers going for it. It's always large enterprises that have a big pocket. It is very expensive as compared to the other tools that we have in the market. They should reduce the price by half, and if they do that, they would do better business. From the competition perspective, other solutions are at a pretty similar level. UiPath is also very expensive. One thing that I always wanted was a short-term consumption license. With Tricentis, the biggest challenge is that you have to go for a minimum of one year license, and they also try to sell you a three-year license. It would be good if people can get a three-month or four-month consumption license."
"If you are purchasing less than five licenses, then the pricing is high. On a scale from one to ten, with one being low and ten being high pricing, I would rate this solution at eight."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature should be reintroduced. Some AI capabilities should be added. There should be an '...
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, OpenText and others in Regression Testing Tools. Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.