OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs k6 Open Source comparison

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. k6 Open Source

Download the complete report

Helped 884,797 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

k6 Open Source

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

7th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (9th)

OpenText Core Performance E...

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of k6 Open Source is 4.4%, up from 3.3% 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.

Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)	9.2%
k6 Open Source	4.4%
Other	86.4%

Load Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ArtemCheremisin

Performance Test Engineer at BETBY

Lighter on the RAM and has native Grafana support

The tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process. Recently, I had a case where I was using another tool, and there wasn't enough memory for it because it required more RAM. k6 Open Source, on the other hand, is lighter and doesn't have a UI, which is beneficial. An engineer I was training could use k6 Open Source scripts even without my help. The tool is more efficient and has native support with Grafana, as both are developed by the same company. This integration enhances monitoring and loss ratio tracking. Thanks to its intelligent GUI, k6 Open Source's design is simpler, particularly for complex scenarios. When we need to manage hundreds of thousands or millions of transactions per minute, the solution becomes a game-changer compared to JMeter.

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 tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."

"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."

"Keeping up with DevOps, thus the best feature of StormRunner is that we don't have to build and maintain infrastructure anymore."

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

"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."

"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."

"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."

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

"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."

"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."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pros

Cons

"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."

"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."

"I have faced several problems using the cloud in different locations, so I rate the stability a six out of ten."

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

"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."

"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."

"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."

"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."

"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

Information not available

"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 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."

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

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"The solution is expensive."

"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."

"It is expensive compared to other tools."

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 Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Performing Arts

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	30

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering k6 Open Source?

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

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

As for the pricing of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), I find it quite expensive compared to other products in the market.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

Regarding improvements in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), the initial configuration where we have to set up orchestration is something that could be improved. If they make...

BlazeMeter vs k6 Open Source

Comparisons

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs k6 Open Source

Compared 10% of the time

Apache JMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 9% of the time

Selenium HQ vs k6 Open Source

Compared 8% of the time

ReadyAPI Performance vs k6 Open Source

Compared 6% of the time

More k6 Open Source Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 16% of the time

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

Compared 13% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 9% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 8% of the time

Perfecto vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Competitors

Product Reports

Load Testing Tools

Download k6 Open Source product report

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) product report

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report

Also Known As

Load Impact

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

Overview

Load Impact offers three main features:

Automated testing - Integrates into your CD pipeline with CI plug-ins or opt for full control with API/SDKs.
API testing - a powerful scripting environment where you can create as simple or complex API scenarios as you need.
Web & web app testing - easily load test your website or web app. Record user scenarios using our Chrome extension or proxy recorder and configure a test with just a few clicks - no programming required.

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

rackspace, salesforce.com, IBM, servicenow, Nasdaq, JWT

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

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. k6 Open Source