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
5th
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 May 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 7.8%, down from 8.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.5%, 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 WebLOAD3.5%
Other88.7%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
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 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 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 reason we chose it and the most valuable feature is the amount of virtual users we can run in a test; we have run up to 900,000 users."
"Before LoadRunner, we weren't even testing performance and now we're performance testing."
"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."
"It's been extremely scalable as far as the testing that we've done with our customers."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of money."
"From end-to-end, starting from creating the load scenarios, to running them, and then reporting, LoadRunner is the best tool."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"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."
 

Cons

"Monitoring and sample access to servers needs to be provided, so that we can explore this and keep up-to-date."
"I don't like their reporting."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"I think the report page could be improved, although we have used the reporting feature."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Because it is a paid tool, its cost is very high."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"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."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"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."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"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's a very expensive solution"
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"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 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."
"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."
"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.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
5%
Performing Arts
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

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?
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...
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: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.