Akamai CloudTest vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) comparison

Akamai and OpenText are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. Akamai is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8. Akamai holds a 2.9% mindshare in PTT, compared to OpenText’s 9.2% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Akamai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Akamai CloudTest

Read 7 Akamai CloudTest reviews

556 Views
506 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Performance E...

Read 45 OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) reviews

2,648 Views
2,277 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Akamai CloudTest

OpenText Core Performance E...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud are competing products in the realm of performance testing. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive feature set appealing to enterprise-level needs despite its premium pricing.

Features: Akamai CloudTest provides real-time analytics, simulates millions of virtual users, and offers detailed insights into application performance. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers extensive integration capabilities, effective cloud-based scalability, and seamless interaction with CI/CD tools. These features cater to complex system requirements and support broad adaptability.

Room for Improvement: Akamai CloudTest could enhance its integration capabilities to support a broader range of environments. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud might improve its cost structure to appeal to budget-conscious organizations, optimize its user interface for easier navigation, and enhance its reporting capabilities for more detailed analysis.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud facilitate cloud-based deployment. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud stands out with smoother integration into existing systems, streamlining the setup process. Akamai CloudTest offers proficient technical support, whereas OpenText provides personalized customer service, resulting in faster problem resolution and increased customer satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: Akamai CloudTest presents a competitive pricing model with lower initial costs, making it attractive for budget-focused organizations. In contrast, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud demands a higher setup cost but promises a substantial ROI owing to its advanced analytics and robust feature set, providing value for enterprises focused on comprehensive performance solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,676 peers since 2012

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

Akamai CloudTest

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

8th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Core Performance E...

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

6th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 2.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.2%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)	9.2%
Akamai CloudTest	2.9%
Other	87.9%

Performance Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil

Senior Manager - Performance Architect at Publicis Sapient

Is user-friendly and offers live monitoring

Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. If you have some integration with Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. I want the tool to have IP spoofing because whenever you do load testing, you will have a little bit of static IP based on a particular load generator. If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement. Having integration to APM tools, like Dynatrace or AppDynamics, the way we have in the load tools, would be good.

Read full review

Jyoti Ranjan Behera

Performance Test Analyst at Sensata Technologies

User-friendly features facilitate monitoring while support could be more responsive

I am satisfied with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as a product, but the ticket resolution time is concerning. The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations. Compared to previous support, I notice that while experts previously resolved issues immediately, current experts take more time to resolve issues, which is the main challenge we are facing. They are now lacking regional support, which takes more time than it used to. My suggestions for improvements to OpenText LoadRunner Cloud would be to have specific experts available who can resolve issues more quickly, as delays can impact project timelines significantly.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."

"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."

"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."

"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."

"The solution is very stable."

"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."

"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."

"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."

"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."

"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."

"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pros

Cons

"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."

"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."

"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."

"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."

"The test clip should be more user-friendly."

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

"Sometimes, you are utilizing one of the low generators, then all of a sudden if you discontinue from one project, it actually deletes the entire low generator."

"The product must provide agents to monitor servers."

"Its scripting features need improvement."

"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."

"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."

"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."

"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."

"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."

"Running cost is very low."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."

"The solution is expensive."

"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

"The solution’s price is considerably high."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Retailer

11%

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	29

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Akamai CloudTest?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Akamai CloudTest?

I use the solution in my company for load testing. You can say that it is used on the API and then for web page-level load testing.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Akamai CloudTest?

The tool's very first benefit is zero maintenance. You need not take care of your controller or load generator, so there is zero maintenance. The second benefit of the tool would be in the area of ...

See all answers

Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing is flexible, offering a more affordable solution compared to the more expensive on-premise LoadRunner. The hourly usage model allows cost-saving when used rightly.

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 29% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 22% of the time

BlazeMeter vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 13% of the time

More Akamai CloudTest Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 28% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 21% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 16% of the time

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest

September 2025

Download Akamai CloudTest product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

August 2025

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) product report

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load

Overview

Soasta's CloudTest rapidly builds realistic test scenarios using real user data, then tests, analyzes and repairs faster. CloudTest's visual test environment and real-time analytics test your website, mobile app and api backend to give you a streaming view of all your performance data while tests run from back-end systems to front end performance.

Akamai

OpenText Core Performance Engineering offers scalable and efficient load testing using a cloud-based architecture, eliminating the need for physical infrastructure and supporting a wide range of users and testing scenarios.

OpenText Core Performance Engineering supports seamless integration with popular tools and delivers real-time anomaly detection and performance insights. With an intuitive interface, it supports scripting protocols and provides tests for cloud-hosted and on-premise applications. The platform streamlines performance testing and infrastructure management, addressing the needs of diverse sectors like banking, retail, and IT. However, it requires enhancements in reporting, integration, documentation, and support for older scripts.

What are the key features?

Rapid Test Setup: Quickly initiate performance tests without extensive configuration efforts.
Scalability: Supports numerous users without loss of performance across global regions.
Global Load Distribution: Allows effective load distribution across different geographies.
Seamless Tool Integration: Integrates smoothly with SiteScope, New Relic, and others.
Real-time Anomaly Detection: Instantly identifies performance anomalies for immediate action.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Minimal Infrastructure Management: Reduces the need for physical resources, saving costs and effort.
Enhanced Application Responsiveness: Ensures applications remain stable under peak loads.
Increased Testing Efficiency: Streamlines testing processes for faster execution.
Cloud-Based Flexibility: Offers dynamic resource allocation to accommodate varying test needs.
Comprehensive Performance Insights: Delivers valuable analytics for optimizing applications.

Organizations in banking, retail, and IT sectors implement OpenText Core Performance Engineering for performance testing, integrating it within CI/CD pipelines. It suits public server application testing and enterprise systems like SAP and Salesforce, meeting diverse industry demands for app stability and responsiveness testing.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

September 2025

Free Report: Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report.

See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.

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.