Top 10 OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Alternatives

4.2 out of 5

84 reviews
90% willing to recommend

Top OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, and Perfecto. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) surpasses its competitors by providing robust performance testing capabilities, seamless integration with CI/CD pipelines, and advanced analytics, ensuring optimal application performance across complex environments and improving business outcomes.

OpenText Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with OpenText, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.

Get the alternatives report

Apache JMeter

3.9 out of 5

Apache JMeter

3.9 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise excels in feature-rich enterprise scenarios with superior reporting, integrating effortlessly with platforms. In comparison, Apache JMeter, while open-source and cost-effective, lacks certain advanced analysis features, appealing to budget-conscious projects. LoadRunner's pricing reflects its robust capabilities, whereas JMeter's free model attracts smaller budgets.

Download Apache JMeter vs. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) has a higher setup cost compared to Apache JMeter, which is more budget-friendly. The pricing difference reflects the comprehensive features of LoadRunner versus the simplicity and cost-effectiveness of JMeter.

View comparison

Pricing

Tricentis NeoLoad

4.1 out of 5

Tricentis NeoLoad

4.1 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise delivers extensive enterprise-level capabilities. In comparison, Tricentis NeoLoad offers cutting-edge features and ease of use. Choose LoadRunner for deep analysis and comprehensive testing, while NeoLoad suits those seeking user-friendly setup and flexible cloud-based functionalities.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. Tricentis NeoLoad Report

Pricing

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise has a straightforward setup cost, while Tricentis NeoLoad offers more flexible pricing options. The cost differences highlight contrasting approaches to budget management and resource allocation between the two solutions.

View comparison

Pricing

Perfecto

4.2 out of 5

Perfecto

4.2 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise excels in integration and scalability, appealing to comprehensive testing environments. In comparison, Perfecto focuses on cloud-based automation and mobile testing, ideal for agility and accessibility. Both offer strong ROI with specific advantages in their target areas.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. Perfecto Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) setup costs are higher than Perfecto's, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.

View comparison

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) setup costs are higher than Perfecto's, which offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.

BlazeMeter

4.1 out of 5

BlazeMeter

4.1 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise offers robust support for diverse testing environments and extensive protocol support, ideal for large-scale enterprise projects. In comparison, BlazeMeter excels with cloud-based scalability and ease of use, suitable for dynamic development teams needing straightforward integration with open-source tools.

Download BlazeMeter vs. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering requires a significant initial setup investment, while BlazeMeter offers a more cost-effective setup, highlighting a difference in affordability and accessibility.

View comparison

Pricing

ReadyAPI

3.9 out of 5

ReadyAPI

3.9 out of 5

LoadRunner Enterprise excels in enterprise-level flexibility, offering comprehensive performance testing capabilities and diverse deployment options. In comparison, ReadyAPI is ideal for API-specific testing with user-friendly features and cost-effective licensing, making it suitable for API-focused projects.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. ReadyAPI Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) requires a higher initial setup cost than ReadyAPI, which favors a more budget-friendly implementation, highlighting a cost difference between these performance engineering and API testing solutions.

View comparison

Pricing

Oracle Application Testing Suite

3.9 out of 5

Oracle Application Testing Suite

3.9 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise stands out for advanced multi-user web interface and robust reporting for global project execution, with integration enhancing flexibility. In comparison, Oracle Application Testing Suite excels in Oracle product integration and scripting, appealing for its cost-effectiveness within Oracle environments.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while Oracle Application Testing Suite typically incurs higher setup costs due to its complexity. These differences highlight the distinct budget considerations for each so...

View comparison

Pricing

k6 Open Source

3.8 out of 5

k6 Open Source

3.8 out of 5

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering excels in scalability and comprehensive reporting, making it suitable for detailed analysis needs. In comparison, k6 Open Source offers ease of use and modern scripting, appealing to those seeking streamlined load testing with minimal setup.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. k6 Open Source Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering involves a higher setup cost due to its comprehensive features, while k6 Open Source offers affordability with its no-cost implementation, drawing a clear distinction in their pricing structure.

View comparison

Pricing

Appvance AIQ Platform

4.0 out of 5

Appvance AIQ Platform

4.0 out of 5

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering is favored for its comprehensive testing capabilities and agile integration. In comparison, Appvance AIQ Platform leverages AI for sophisticated automation. OpenText suits those seeking extensive analytics, while Appvance appeals to those desiring user-friendly deployment and adaptive AI features.

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) setup cost is typically higher, while Appvance AIQ Platform offers more flexibility in pricing. The key difference lies in the upfront financial commitment required between the two platforms.

View comparison

Pricing

Eggplant Performance

3.9 out of 5

Eggplant Performance

3.9 out of 5

OpenText enables complex scenario testing with flexible configurations, appealing to enterprises needing extensive performance engineering. In comparison, Eggplant, with its straightforward deployment and automation focus, suits tech buyers seeking ease of use, compatibility, and quick integration across various platforms.

Download Eggplant Performance vs. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) features a straightforward setup cost, while Eggplant Performance's setup cost is higher, reflecting its comprehensive capabilities.

View comparison

Pricing

RadView WebLOAD

4.1 out of 5

RadView WebLOAD

4.1 out of 5

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise excels in scalability and comprehensive integration, ideal for complex enterprise setups. In comparison, RadView WebLOAD offers cost-effective, streamlined deployment, appealing for budget-conscious businesses needing straightforward solutions. A tech buyer may choose based on scalability needs or budget constraints.

Download OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. RadView WebLOAD Report

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) setup costs are higher due to advanced features, while RadView WebLOAD offers a more cost-effective setup.

View comparison

Pricing

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) setup costs are higher due to advanced features, while RadView WebLOAD offers a more cost-effective setup.

Show 8 more products

Related categories

Performance Testing Tools

Load Testing Tools

API Testing Tools