No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs RadView WebLOAD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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 Core Performance E...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 7.8%, down from 9.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.4%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)7.8%
RadView WebLOAD3.4%
Other88.8%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Centralized cloud testing has improved global load generation and real-time performance insights
The most valuable features I have found in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) are that everything is online and centralized, so I do not need to go anywhere to check the configuration and everything. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)'s advanced analytics help identify performance bottlenecks because whenever we are executing the test scripts, it shows a good analytics view where we can simply check which APIs are not performing well. The cloud-based load generators in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) have benefited my testing setup because we can generate the load across the globe, which was previously a little bit difficult on the on-premises version. The user interface in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is intuitive and this will be easy to communicate and collaborate amongst the team also because sharing the online URL with the team, they can simply check the analysis and everything.
it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"The solution has been quite good and integrates well with other products."
"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 you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The solution can scale."
"It is very easy to set up a load test, to start it and end it, and it is valuable that it is very easy to use."
"I rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud ten out of ten."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
 

Cons

"I don't like their reporting."
"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."
"Out of the box reporting could be improved."
"I think the report page could be improved, although we have used the reporting feature."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"The analysis feature in OpenText LoadRunner Cloud requires improvement. In-depth analysis tools found in the standalone LoadRunner analysis, such as graph merging and setting granularity, would be beneficial."
"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 would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"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."
"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."
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"We purchased a license for two years."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Performing Arts
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing shows it is very high and very costly.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) can be improved by incorporating code improvements. I would add that it reduces the initial setup complexity, improves the learning curve op...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. RadView WebLOAD and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.