OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

OpenText and Progress Software are both solutions in the Load Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.4, while Progress Software is ranked #12. OpenText holds a 8.4% mindshare in LTT, compared to Progress Software’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText Core Performance E...

Read 47 OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) reviews

3,852 Views
3,159 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

2,044 Views
429 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Performance E...

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and Telerik Test Studio are competitive solutions in performance and testing domains. OpenText holds an advantage in terms of comprehensive features, while Telerik is noted for its cost-effectiveness despite higher pricing, suggesting greater value over time.

Features: OpenText Core Performance Engineering boasts robust load testing capabilities, extensive analytics, and versatile integrations. Telerik Test Studio excels in intuitive test automation, seamless Visual Studio integration, and support for both web and desktop applications.

Room for Improvement: OpenText's user interface could be more user-friendly and its configuration process simplified. It lacks some flexibility in script editing. Telerik could enhance its reporting features and provide more detailed analytics. Its support for mobile platforms needs improvement and more integration options could be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Core Performance Engineering offers straightforward cloud-based deployment but experiences variability in customer service. Telerik Test Studio provides a more traditional setup with strong support and detailed documentation, making its deployment process smoother but lacking cloud advantages.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Core Performance Engineering involves higher initial costs but offers substantial ROI through comprehensive load testing features. Telerik Test Studio, while more expensive, provides significant long-term value with its flexible automation capabilities and broad compatibility, highlighting OpenText as feature-focused and Telerik as a value-oriented choice.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 893,164 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

OpenText Core Performance E...

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

5th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (5th)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (23rd), Regression Testing Tools (13th), Test Automation Tools (22nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 8.4%, down from 9.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 2.6%, up from 0.4% 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)	8.4%
Telerik Test Studio	2.6%
Other	89.0%

Load Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

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

"From end-to-end, starting from creating the load scenarios, to running them, and then reporting, LoadRunner is the best tool."

"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."

"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."

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

"Before StormRunner Load, we didn’t have a clear developer roadmap, and now it’s very clear where we should invest, our weakest links, and what we need to do to strengthen weak links."

"StormRunner does the job in a very simple and cost effective way."

"We can determine response times for our external applications, from most places around the world, for a small fee."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pros

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"The object repository is the most valuable feature, as different elements can be identified and reutilized through the repository across other scripts, and the product has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

"The way it identifies elements is good."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

Cons

"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."

"The monitoring abilities were lacking."

"During the initial days of high concurrency testing (300,000 and 600,000) we had issues with the StormRunner infrastructure e.g. graphs disappeared in the middle of a test, and HP had to give an online fix."

"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."

"Out of the box reporting could be improved."

"I don't like their reporting."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) cons

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging."

"We have not seen a return on investment yet."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"The solution is expensive."

"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 expensive compared to other tools."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

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

893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	30

No data available

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 12% of the time

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

Compared 11% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 8% of the time

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

Compared 7% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 5% of the time

k6 Open Source vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 4% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

April 2026

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2026

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

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

Telerik Test Studio empowers users with intuitive automation tools suitable for both novices and experts. Its standout features include robust element fetching and data parameterization, ensuring streamlined automation processes.

Telerik Test Studio is recognized for its powerful object repository which enhances element identification and reuse. Its user-friendly interface simplifies automation, even for newcomers. Integral features like record and play streamline repetitive tasks. The solution strengthens project outcomes with features like performance and load testing, PDF validation for detailed reports, and efficient data parameterization. Compatibility issues with load testing and validation challenges in Excel and Word are areas for improvement. Users require minimal coding effort for end-to-end testing with databases and document validation.

What are the key features of Telerik Test Studio?

Object Repository: Enhances element identification and reuse.
Record and Play: Facilitates task simplification.
Performance Testing: Offers impressive capabilities in load testing.
PDF Validation: Aids in testing detailed reports and documents.
Data Parameterization: Streamlines data management within tests.

What are the noteworthy benefits and ROI aspects?

Intuitive Interface: Welcomes users of all expertise levels.
Automation Efficiency: Simplifies script creation and testing procedures.
Reduced Coding: Minimizes code writing for end-to-end testing.
Performance Validation: Strengthens load and performance evaluations.

Industries like healthcare and HR have embraced Telerik Test Studio for automating UI and functional tests, with on-premises deployment for performance and automation testing. It supports load validation, script creation, and excels in PDF validations, enhancing compatibility with Microsoft tools for expanded future use.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

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

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

April 2026

Free Report: OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio report.

See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.