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

Cavisson NetStorm vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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

Cavisson NetStorm
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Performance E...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Cavisson NetStorm is 1.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.5%, up from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)9.5%
Cavisson NetStorm1.5%
Other89.0%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1329360 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Architect at Kohl's
Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase
NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage. NetStorm has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase. One more great functionality is the ability to control the load runtime by increasing or decreasing the virtual users or pausing the users to keep on repeating the transactions without exiting.
Jyoti Ranjan Behera - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"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 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 most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."
"The solution can scale."
"It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort."
"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."
 

Cons

"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"NetStorm is priced well when compared to many well-known tools."
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"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."
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"It's a very expensive solution"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
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.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Oracle, Macy's, Redbox, art.com, Pronto Networks, A10 Networks, Renesas, San Jose Medical Group
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Find out what your peers are saying about Cavisson NetStorm vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.