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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs ReadyAPI Performance 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
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.4%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Performance is 2.9%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.4%
ReadyAPI Performance2.9%
Other90.7%
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.
Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Open-source and flexible but needs client-side scripting
It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS. Also, the APIs tested with SoapUI can be directly used, avoiding the need to create collections like in Postman. The client-side scripting, if incorporated, would provide a complete solution for performance tests. It can handle user distribution and transaction throughput distribution effectively.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"It gives you a wide-ranging view on performance bottlenecks, from CPU to memory to network etc. This helps identify possible bottlenecks in the production environment, as well as the expected and unexpected loads."
"The solution solves my needs and provides everything required to carry out performance load testing."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"It's the most flexible and best solution for our people who are both offshore and onshore because of the reporting capabilities."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"It is a very good and handy product, there are so many features, and it is getting more popular day by day."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"Eventually, we enhanced the whole automation, and how it should get integrated with the hardware, or another tool like Jenkins for CI/CD automation."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS."
 

Cons

"I'd like to be able to carry out transaction comparisons with previous tests."
"Almost all the areas improve drastically with each version; however, the correlation of scripts, analysis and reporting can be further improved. Their technical support could also be improved."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"Integration with other APM tools like DynaTrace or AppDynamics is a little tedious."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"Mobility, I think, is the biggest for us right now."
"The reporting could be a lot better. It's cumbersome."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
"The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"It is very slow sometimes. If they could improve its performance, it would be really great for the users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
"The price is a bit too high."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"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."
"This solution operates on a licence basis and the usage and cost varies according to the use case. It is more expensive if you include access to the learning center. On average it costs approximately 800 Euros."
"ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable."
"We find the cost to be affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load 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
18%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Retailer
10%
Performing Arts
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

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 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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
I always consider the purposes and use cases from an enterprise version perspective as a user of the product.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI Performance?
Load UI is mostly free, and the pricing for the pro version is very affordable compared to other tools like LoadRunner.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI Performance?
The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool.
What is your primary use case for ReadyAPI Performance?
The primary use case is to conduct server-side performance tests, scalability tests, and endurance tests using SoapUI and Load UI.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
LoadUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Mercedes-Benz, Adobe, Hilton Hotels, The Home Depot
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. ReadyAPI Performance and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.