I would prefer it to be cheaper. On a scale of one to ten, the price is a five. It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter ( /products/apache-jmeter-reviews ), which is free.
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.
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 equally. LoadRunner has been around for a long time, and while some companies have moved away from it, the higher pricing can be attributed to its support for multiple protocols. For instance, it supports over 40 protocols, including SAP, Citrix, Oracle databases, and batch testing. This wide range of protocol support is one reason for the higher cost. Depending on the applications being tested, whether desktop, Citrix or something else, you may need to purchase specific protocol-based licenses. LoadRunner offers a free license for up to fifty users, which may not be adequate for most projects. Projects require more load to simulate real business scenarios, so a more comprehensive pricing model may be necessary. Two main licensing budgets are to consider: one for LoadRunner and another for NeoLoad. If a project has no budget for purchasing a product and is looking for open-source tools, I highly recommend starting with Apache JMeter. However, it's important to note that JMeter may not be flexible enough for all requirements, especially for desktop applications, as it has limitations. JMeter operates in a single interface and lacks commercial tools' structured reporting and usability features, making it less user-friendly. While it’s a good starting point due to being free, users may need extra effort to organize and interpret results. We recently evaluated OpenText's LoadRunner and NeoLoad for a project. We engaged with both vendors to take demos and understand their licensing models. Generally, NeoLoad's pricing was comparable to LoadRunne
Senior Manager, Performance Engineering at Enel Group
Real User
Top 10
Jun 3, 2024
It's a very expensive solution. Our organization would have probably struggled with a different tool because, in the market, there are varying customized tools aimed toward dedicated clients or enterprises.
The solution is a bit expensive. The pay-as-you-go model offered by LoadRunner Cloud is important to us, especially when considering the cost-effectiveness of performance testing.
The pay-as-you-go licensing model included in our cloud migration is a valuable feature. It ensures we only pay for what we use, eliminating unnecessary fees during periods of low activity. The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average.
Learn what your peers think about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2025.
Cloud Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Oct 27, 2023
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.
Performance & Analytics Team Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Oct 20, 2023
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.
Senior Quality & Test Architect at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Mar 9, 2023
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. That's one of the benefits of the cloud. The most important aspect of the cloud is that it applies to everything. They take care of the inconvenience of maintaining the infrastructure required to support your performance testing environment, regardless of the application. I'm familiar with both. I have been with LoadRunner long enough to understand what it's like to manage one of those environments because the cloud didn't exist ten years ago. That's significant time and effort savings for the customer, but you pay for it. If they don't give it away for free, you have everyone who will have someone do all the maintenance for you, such as setting up your servers and making sure they use to start up the servers appropriately with the right level of software and keep the software up to date, and all that stuff. That costs money, and it is not free. There must be a careful balancing act between how much you will use the cloud and what you will do on-premise.
We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000. I don't think there are any additional costs to standard licensing.
It's a subscription-based, pay-per-user license. I wouldn't say it's expensive. Because it was an on-premise license, it was a costly affair. Only certain stakeholders could use it. Now, it is enterprise-wide, we can have any number of cloud users performing the load testing because it is pay-per-user.
There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use. It is difficult to predict the costs until after you have begun using it.
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...
I would prefer it to be cheaper. On a scale of one to ten, the price is a five. It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter ( /products/apache-jmeter-reviews ), which is free.
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.
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 equally. LoadRunner has been around for a long time, and while some companies have moved away from it, the higher pricing can be attributed to its support for multiple protocols. For instance, it supports over 40 protocols, including SAP, Citrix, Oracle databases, and batch testing. This wide range of protocol support is one reason for the higher cost. Depending on the applications being tested, whether desktop, Citrix or something else, you may need to purchase specific protocol-based licenses. LoadRunner offers a free license for up to fifty users, which may not be adequate for most projects. Projects require more load to simulate real business scenarios, so a more comprehensive pricing model may be necessary. Two main licensing budgets are to consider: one for LoadRunner and another for NeoLoad. If a project has no budget for purchasing a product and is looking for open-source tools, I highly recommend starting with Apache JMeter. However, it's important to note that JMeter may not be flexible enough for all requirements, especially for desktop applications, as it has limitations. JMeter operates in a single interface and lacks commercial tools' structured reporting and usability features, making it less user-friendly. While it’s a good starting point due to being free, users may need extra effort to organize and interpret results. We recently evaluated OpenText's LoadRunner and NeoLoad for a project. We engaged with both vendors to take demos and understand their licensing models. Generally, NeoLoad's pricing was comparable to LoadRunne
It's a very expensive solution. Our organization would have probably struggled with a different tool because, in the market, there are varying customized tools aimed toward dedicated clients or enterprises.
The solution is a bit expensive. The pay-as-you-go model offered by LoadRunner Cloud is important to us, especially when considering the cost-effectiveness of performance testing.
The pay-as-you-go licensing model included in our cloud migration is a valuable feature. It ensures we only pay for what we use, eliminating unnecessary fees during periods of low activity. The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average.
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.
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.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is economical. However, it is expensive compared to other tools.
The solution is expensive. There should be a version that optimizes the price-to-performance ratio for the service package.
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. That's one of the benefits of the cloud. The most important aspect of the cloud is that it applies to everything. They take care of the inconvenience of maintaining the infrastructure required to support your performance testing environment, regardless of the application. I'm familiar with both. I have been with LoadRunner long enough to understand what it's like to manage one of those environments because the cloud didn't exist ten years ago. That's significant time and effort savings for the customer, but you pay for it. If they don't give it away for free, you have everyone who will have someone do all the maintenance for you, such as setting up your servers and making sure they use to start up the servers appropriately with the right level of software and keep the software up to date, and all that stuff. That costs money, and it is not free. There must be a careful balancing act between how much you will use the cloud and what you will do on-premise.
I'm not aware of the cost. I don't handle that aspect of the product. My understanding, however, is that it is a little bit pricey.
When we compare the price of LoadRunner Cloud with that of products by other SaaS providers, it is a little bit on the higher side.
We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000. I don't think there are any additional costs to standard licensing.
It's a subscription-based, pay-per-user license. I wouldn't say it's expensive. Because it was an on-premise license, it was a costly affair. Only certain stakeholders could use it. Now, it is enterprise-wide, we can have any number of cloud users performing the load testing because it is pay-per-user.
There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use. It is difficult to predict the costs until after you have begun using it.