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

Appvance AIQ Platform vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

Appvance AIQ Platform
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
17th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (50th), Functional Testing Tools (33rd), Regression Testing Tools (16th), Test Automation Tools (32nd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (6th)
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Appvance AIQ Platform is 2.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 14.4%, up from 13.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)14.4%
Appvance AIQ Platform2.6%
Other83.0%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user129477 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Tester/QA at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Network Emulation allows for performance testing of geographically-distributed users.
It is a great performance testing tool. The most valuable feature of the tool is its Avatar technology. Scripting is really fast, compared to other tools. It works for almost all major protocols, platforms and browsers. It makes complex scenarios simple, and we need minimal custom coding. It also provides features for Network Emulation, which is quite helpful in testing the performance for geographically-distributed users. Appvance can provide information from end to end (back-end and front-end), which makes it surpass other tools. The tool provides protocol level as well as browser level response time. And it can be integrated with major monitoring tools. As it is a web-based tool, it makes it easy to access anywhere anytime. All the team members can access the common information easily.
SR
Assistant Director at Synapxe
Has enabled my team to identify bottlenecks effectively and deliver reliable performance analysis across projects
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 heard of any significant issues. I can gather specific improvement suggestions from my architect and provide that information later.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a great performance testing tool."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."
"The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"It's helped my organization to identify performance problems in the test environment before they occur in production."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"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."
 

Cons

"Reporting features can be improved to provide more flexibility, collation, exporting in different formats, etc."
"If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help."
"The flexibility could be improved."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
"I would rate the technical support a one out of five. The technical support is very bad."
"The flexibility could be improved. For example, there are some use cases where I prefer to use NeoLoad rather than LoadRunner because of the flexibility that it provides."
"HP as a company has been slow to move to support modern technologies e.g. Oracle ADF."
"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."
"Some form of automation is needed in this product, whether it's integration with CI/CD or providing the facility to import JSON files, so that we can automatically create the scripts."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"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."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"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."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of 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."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 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
Construction Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise67
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I work only with the performance testing tools and not with OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) for mobile and web applications. With performance testing, I am t...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Bell Canada, CBS, UBC, PepsiCo, 7-11, BenefitVision, Kabbage, Catalent Pharmaceuticals, McKesson, Veritas, Cherwell, QAT Global, Sony, SiriusXM, CoPart, Auto Parts Alliance, PPD
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: May 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.