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
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (51st), Functional Testing Tools (34th), Regression Testing Tools (16th), Test Automation Tools (31st), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (7th)
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 August 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Appvance AIQ Platform is 2.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 15.3%, up from 14.8% 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)15.3%
Appvance AIQ Platform2.4%
Other82.3%
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."
"It helped our organization to run successful performance testing cycles and to identify the bottlenecks of the application."
"My favorite feature in LoadRunner Professional is its ability to group scripts under separate IDs."
"A very comprehensive tool that is good for performance testing."
"The price is a bit high but if you procure the HPE LoadRunner you will get many benefits such as excellent technical support, a wide range of supported protocols, a great document library and easy help from the technical communities for your problems."
"LoadRunner Professional's best features are that it's easy to capture scenarios and create scripts for testing, the testing runs smoothly with small resources, and it's very easy to create reports with a variety of indicators."
"LoadRunner is the standard choice for performance testing before any critical applications are allowed to go live, preventing any performance issues."
"The most valuable feature of LoadRunner is its ability to simulate multiple uses at the same time."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
 

Cons

"Reporting features can be improved to provide more flexibility, collation, exporting in different formats, etc."
"Customer Service: Very poor Technical Support: Strictly ok"
"I would like to see better-licensing costs."
"It's a very expensive tool so I think licensing costs could be reduced."
"I think it needs to have better reporting."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"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."
"There should be more integration with more open-source platforms."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"This is not a cheap product."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 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
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

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: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.