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

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs OpenText LoadRunner Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 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 LoadRunner Cloud
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 8.3%, down from 9.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.9%, down from 14.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement
The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Keeping up with DevOps, thus the best feature of StormRunner is that we don't have to build and maintain infrastructure anymore."
"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."
"A vital feature of the solution is its ability to compose realistic scenarios for performance testing"
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"The solution is easy to use."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"One of the most valuable features of LoadRunner Professional is the wide range of protocols it supports, especially the web user v user types."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"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 most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"It should have a feature to report with a 99.9 percentile success rate."
"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"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 initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"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."
"Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement."
"Sometimes when we were migrating from one version to another, some of our scripts started failing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"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."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"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 pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"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."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"This is not a cheap product."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 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
20%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
The pricing is high compared to other licensing tools like NeoLoad. It's not excessively expensive but higher than NeoLoad. However, in my experience, clients often weigh NeoLoad and LoadRunner equ...
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 '...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.