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

k6 and OpenText are both solutions in the Load Testing Tools category. k6 is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.9. k6 holds a 4.5% mindshare in LTT, compared to OpenText’s 10.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of k6 users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

k6 Open Source

Read 2 k6 Open Source reviews

914 Views
695 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Performance E...

Read 45 OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) reviews

2,539 Views
2,184 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

k6 Open Source

OpenText Core Performance E...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

k6 Open Source and OpenText Core Performance Engineering LoadRunner Cloud are competitors in the load testing category. OpenText Core Performance Engineering LoadRunner Cloud may hold an advantage due to its advanced features and comprehensive capabilities designed for enterprise-level needs.

Features: k6 Open Source emphasizes scripting flexibility, ease of integration, and a lightweight runtime, making it suitable for developers seeking adaptable solutions. OpenText Core Performance Engineering LoadRunner Cloud offers comprehensive test scenarios, extensive protocol support, and robust analytics, making it ideal for enterprises with complex testing demands.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: k6 Open Source provides a straightforward setup with a wealth of online resources supporting users. In contrast, OpenText Core Performance Engineering LoadRunner Cloud incorporates cloud capabilities, enabling wider deployments, though it may require additional time and assistance for complex needs. Its customer service is recognized for supporting larger, intricate environments.

Pricing and ROI: k6 Open Source is a cost-effective choice with no licensing fees, offering a good ROI for smaller applications due to its lower initial costs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering LoadRunner Cloud involves higher upfront expenses but promises significant ROI through its sophisticated testing capabilities, making it a worthwhile investment for large organizations requiring extensive performance testing.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. k6 Open Source Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

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

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of k6 Open Source is 4.5%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 10.4%, up from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Load Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)	10.4%
k6 Open Source	4.5%
Other	85.1%

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."

"The most useful features of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud include getting load through the Performance Center, which is part of the cloud version, where we can monitor CPU and memory utilization, and response times."

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

"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."

"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."

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

"The solution is easy to use."

"The solution can scale."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pros

Cons

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

"Some improvements can be made to the solution's user interface"

"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."

"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."

"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."

"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."

"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."

"The product price could be more affordable."

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

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."

"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."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"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."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Media Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

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	29

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

BlazeMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 15% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs k6 Open Source

Compared 14% of the time

Selenium HQ vs k6 Open Source

Compared 9% of the time

Apache JMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 9% of the time

ReadyAPI Performance vs k6 Open Source

Compared 5% of the time

More k6 Open Source Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 21% of the time

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

Compared 15% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 10% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) 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

Buyer's Guide

Load Testing Tools

January 2026

Download k6 Open Source product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

January 2026

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) product 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

Buyer's Guide

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

December 2025

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

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. k6 Open Source and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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

See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Load Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.