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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs SmartBear LoadNinja comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 13, 2025

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 Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear LoadNinja
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
11th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.3%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 1.5%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"​Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"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."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
 

Cons

"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"It needs time to mature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"The tool is very expensive."
"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."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"The price is a bit too high."
"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Healthcare Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
What do you like most about SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement.
What needs improvement with SmartBear LoadComplete?
SmartBear LoadNinja presented issues around some use cases that we wanted to do. We were using the solution to simulate using a browser and to give some browser access to our use case for multiple ...
What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear LoadComplete?
For API, we were previously using JMeter, which is an open-source solution. Overall, I rate SmartBear LoadNinja a seven out of ten.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
SmartBear LoadComplete
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Falafel Software
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. SmartBear LoadNinja and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.