Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Silk Performer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 30, 2025

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 Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
OpenText Silk Performer
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
22nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.5%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Silk Performer is 1.6%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.5%
OpenText Silk Performer1.6%
Other91.9%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2668566 - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Ensures high performance and adaptability while providing room for improved analytics and support
The analytics and reporting features can be improved, though they are good enough. If you have expertise, you can manage with what is included. However, it could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities. When considering areas for improvement in OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), there is a need for automated analysis and code-level support.
SR
Principal Software Architect at OpenText
Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy
In terms of areas of improvement, I would say the Silk Performance Explorer tool, which is used for monitoring and analysis, can be improved because that's where we spend most of our time when we're analyzing the test data. Any enhancements that can be provided in the monitoring sphere would be useful. When you have a large amount of data the tool struggles with it and will sometimes crash, or there may be issues with too many metrics being collected when running a test. The interface for the scripting could be more feature-rich. Integration with tools like Prometheus or Grafana where we can visualize the data would be great. As things stand, we have to use one monitoring tool to visualize data and another for visualizing the test metrics. Integration would enable us to see the metrics from Silk and correlate that with the metrics from other servers or other processes we're monitoring. It would save having to look at Silk data and server metrics separately. It's the way things are going with newer tools. I think the solution is being phased out by Micro Focus and their emphasis is focused more on LoadRunner. We haven't seen much development in the last few years.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"It has offered me some reliability against other products, like JMeter or some other tools."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
 

Cons

"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Marketing Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise73
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
When discussing price, OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is very expensive, which I would represent by a rating of ten. The product carries maximum expense points.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Regarding negative sides or areas for improvement, I do not see any disadvantages so far. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) might have some drawbacks, but I did no...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Micro Focus Silk Performer, Silk Performer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
University of Colorado, Medidata, Monash University
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Load Testing Tools. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.