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

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs ReadyAPI Performance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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 Professional Perfo...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
10th
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 February 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 11.2%, down from 11.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Performance is 2.8%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)11.2%
ReadyAPI Performance2.8%
Other86.0%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SD
Assistant Consultant at Tata Consultancy
Experience a decade of seamless performance with robust support
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those points remain similar and applicable. For future updates, I would like to see the same features that people generally prefer. I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible; if we get a chance to work with that, then we can check how much it helps.
Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
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

"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"The capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"Enables us to test most of the products and projects that we have across all the different technologies, without having to look at other tools."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are the separate module for scripting, execution analysis, and integration with a lot of new things pipeline areas. They keep updating their releases. Recently, they have released different versions, such as the professional and enterprise. They're coming up with new features which are good."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"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."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"We can scale."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"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."
 

Cons

"The reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"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."
"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."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive."
"The pricing model and the software licensing model could be better."
"ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"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.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
11%
Media Company
11%
Performing Arts
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I have mentioned many advantages about this product, but to discuss disadvantages or areas that could be improved, I would need to consult with my engineers who are working on it. So far I have not...
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 Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
LoadUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Mercedes-Benz, Adobe, Hilton Hotels, The Home Depot
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs. ReadyAPI Performance and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.