Akamai CloudTest vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) comparison

Akamai and OpenText are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. Akamai is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.6. Akamai holds a 3.1% mindshare in PTT, compared to OpenText’s 12.1% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Akamai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Akamai CloudTest

Read 7 Akamai CloudTest reviews

734 Views
617 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Read 82 OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) reviews

3,922 Views
3,059 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Akamai CloudTest

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Akamai CloudTest and OpenText LoadRunner Professional are competing in the performance testing software market. Akamai CloudTest is favored for its pricing and support, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is recognized for its robust feature set.

Features: Akamai CloudTest provides real-time analytics, rapid test creation, and customizable dashboards. OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers extensive protocol coverage, advanced scripting capabilities, and the ability to simulate multiple users.

Room for Improvement: Akamai CloudTest can enhance its integrations, expand protocol support, and improve detailed documentation. OpenText LoadRunner Professional could benefit from a more intuitive user interface, simplified setup procedures, and enhanced real-time monitoring capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Akamai CloudTest's cloud-based deployment simplifies setup and gains praise for quick resolution from support. OpenText LoadRunner Professional, though more complex to deploy, offers comprehensive documentation and training resources beneficial for technical operations.

Pricing and ROI: Akamai CloudTest is appreciated for its transparent pricing model, appealing to those minimizing upfront costs and seeking rapid ROI. OpenText LoadRunner Professional demands a more significant initial investment, justified by long-term benefits and comprehensive capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,103 peers since 2012

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

Akamai CloudTest

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

8th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 3.1%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 12.1%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)	12.1%
Akamai CloudTest	3.1%
Other	84.8%

Performance Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil

Senior Manager - Performance Architect at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

Is user-friendly and offers live monitoring

Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. If you have some integration with Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. I want the tool to have IP spoofing because whenever you do load testing, you will have a little bit of static IP based on a particular load generator. If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement. Having integration to APM tools, like Dynatrace or AppDynamics, the way we have in the load tools, would be good.

Read full review

Saswata Dhar

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."

"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."

"This is an awesome performance testing tool for web based applications, able to generate load multiple geographies, dynamic ramp-up to any levels of virtual users."

"The solution is very stable."

"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."

"It has good protocol coverage."

"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 most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."

"Paramterization and correlation are important features."

"The solution supports a lot of protocols."

"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."

"One of the most valuable features of LoadRunner Professional is the wide range of protocols it supports, especially the web user v user types."

"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pros

Cons

"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."

"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."

"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."

"The test clip should be more user-friendly."

"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."

"The debugging capability should be improved."

"The solution lacks some form of integration."

"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"

"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."

"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."

"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."

"Improvement wise, the pipeline should be enabled. It should be embedded as part of the tool itself rather than going with third-party tools. Monitoring should be more effective as well."

"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."

"Running cost is very low."

"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."

"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."

"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."

"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."

"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."

"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."

"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."

"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user104961

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…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Retailer

11%

Comms Service Provider

Government

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Government

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	17
Midsize Enterprise	14
Large Enterprise	66

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Akamai CloudTest?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Akamai CloudTest?

I use the solution in my company for load testing. You can say that it is used on the API and then for web page-level load testing.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Akamai CloudTest?

The tool's very first benefit is zero maintenance. You need not take care of your controller or load generator, so there is zero maintenance. The second benefit of the tool would be in the area of ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?

The pricing should be reduced and made more competitive.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 19% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 12% of the time

k6 Open Source vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 11% of the time

Apache JMeter vs Akamai CloudTest

Compared 10% of the time

More Akamai CloudTest Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 21% of the time

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 8% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 5% of the time

ReadyAPI Performance vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest

February 2026

Download Akamai CloudTest product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

January 2026

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) report

Download OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) product report

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner

Overview

Soasta's CloudTest rapidly builds realistic test scenarios using real user data, then tests, analyzes and repairs faster. CloudTest's visual test environment and real-time analytics test your website, mobile app and api backend to give you a streaming view of all your performance data while tests run from back-end systems to front end performance.

Akamai

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering, known as LoadRunner Professional, stands out with its powerful scripting tool, flexible capabilities, and extensive analytics, supporting numerous concurrent users for impactful load testing.

This performance engineering tool offers integration across systems and strong community support, paired with user-friendly interfaces. It excels in features like multi-protocol support, auto-correlation, and detailed reporting. However, improvements are needed in user-friendliness and cost-effectiveness, as scripting remains complex and pricing is a hurdle. Enhancing mobile and SPA testing capabilities, modern protocol support, and compatibility with non-Windows platforms would greatly benefit users while expanding monitoring and technical support responsiveness.

What are the key features of OpenText LoadRunner Professional?

Powerful Scripting Tool: Facilitates complex load testing scenarios.
Flexible Engine: Supports various test configurations.
Multi-Protocol Support: Ensures broad compatibility.
Extensive Analytics: Provides real-time performance stats.
Concurrent User Simulation: Enables robust load testing.
Auto-Correlation: Simplifies script creation.
Comprehensive Reporting: Offers detailed insights.

What benefits should users expect from LoadRunner Professional?

Enhanced System Performance: Identifies and rectifies bottlenecks.
Cost Efficiency: Strategic use can reduce overall costs.
Industry Compatibility: Adapts to diverse environments.
Scalability: Supports applications with varied user loads.
Performance Benchmarking: Ensures optimal application performance.

LoadRunner Professional is employed for performance and load testing across sectors such as banking, hospitality, and telecommunications. Users simulate business transactions and test applications under different user loads, focusing on API testing, web applications, and benchmarking to achieve optimal performance in complex scenarios.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media

Buyer's Guide

Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

January 2026

Free Report: Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Akamai CloudTest vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) report.

See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors and best Load Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Performance Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.