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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 2.6%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.6%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 13.5%, down from 13.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. 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.

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."
"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."
"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."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"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."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"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."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"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."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"LoadRunner is a very systematic tool for anyone to use. Even someone who is actually a first time user of LoadRunner can actually get a lot of benefit out of the tool."
"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."
"The most important feature for us is that it supports a lot of protocols because we support all of them, including HTTP, FTP, mainframe, and others."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"The test clip should be more user-friendly."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"The debugging capability should be improved."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"The price is really steep. It's an enterprise-level tool."
"There is an ROI. What LoadRunner does, is it prevents failures when there are many, many concurrent users in the systems of a company."
"The tool is very expensive."
"This solution can be expensive."
"The solution should decrease its price."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"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."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's pricing is reasonable."
"The licensing of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. If it can be easier and the concurrent run can be included with the current total number of users, it would be helpful."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"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."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"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."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
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
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
10%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
19%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Akamai CloudTest?
Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP ...
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...
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 th...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration in...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and ...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my cust...
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 help...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
Technical support needs to be faster, and the pricing should be more competitive. The virtual table server feature sh...
 

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.
850,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.