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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs RadView WebLOAD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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 Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
86
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
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 August 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.9%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.4%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.9%
RadView WebLOAD3.4%
Other89.7%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VK
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Performance testing has supported web app peak analysis but needs better setup and smarter scripting
Regarding points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringing AI features into the tool, it could save maximum time in scripting or make scripting effortless, particularly in correlation, which is where the complexity involved in script development exists. If any AI features could replace or eliminate more manual work on the correlation part, that is where we could see a game-changing improvement for the tool. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) can be positioned very well in the market. However, I see that the basic correlations are only being handled by the autocorrelation engine in the LoadRunner tool, and I would expect a few improvements to handle even complex correlation problems so that the tool can be appropriately positioned compared to their peers.
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

"It's the tool for performance testing, and it's definitely the industry leader that I've been using for years."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution."
"We can book load generators."
"I think it's the best product out there for performance and load testing."
"The solution does support a wide range of technologies and protocols. Plus, two features, network virtualization, and service virtualization, are really helpful. Apart from that, the way they have their billing scenarios, like the execution, is very good."
"For us, the features we value and use the most are web and HTTP support."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"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 analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"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

"OpenText needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."
"It was a bit complex in terms of administration but we got help from technical people."
"It would be nice if the Citrix protocol could be updated."
"More features to support testing in DevOps environment(s)."
"Storing the results of our tests requires the use of a lot of memory in our data center."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"Unfortunately, technical support is not as good as it used to be. From an end-user perspective, coming from both me and several of my team members, we have found that over the last year and a half, the quality of support has gone down a couple of notches."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"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."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"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."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is very expensive."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"ROI is 200%."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"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 a license for two years."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Performing Arts
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise75
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

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 points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
My use case for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is related to enterprise twenty six, which we are going to upgrade now. We focus on web applications.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. RadView WebLOAD and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.