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

Cavisson NetStorm vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Cavisson NetStorm
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Performance E...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Cavisson NetStorm is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.2%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)9.2%
Cavisson NetStorm1.4%
Other89.4%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1329360 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Architect at Kohl's
Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase
NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage. NetStorm has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase. One more great functionality is the ability to control the load runtime by increasing or decreasing the virtual users or pausing the users to keep on repeating the transactions without exiting.
Jyoti Ranjan Behera - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Test Analyst at Sensata Technologies
User-friendly features facilitate monitoring while support could be more responsive
I am satisfied with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as a product, but the ticket resolution time is concerning. The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations. Compared to previous support, I notice that while experts previously resolved issues immediately, current experts take more time to resolve issues, which is the main challenge we are facing. They are now lacking regional support, which takes more time than it used to. My suggestions for improvements to OpenText LoadRunner Cloud would be to have specific experts available who can resolve issues more quickly, as delays can impact project timelines significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The reason we chose it and the most valuable feature is the amount of virtual users we can run in a test; we have run up to 900,000 users."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."
"Running a 300,000 test was very easy using StormRunner, as we just had to upload the script and create scenarios for 300,000 and run the test in 20 minutes."
"It's a fast product, so you don't have much trouble in terms of maintenance overhead. You don't want to just look into configuring load generators, look for upgrades, and end up having that take up a lot of your time. With this solution, you just log in and you start using it. This means that there is a huge benefit in terms of the overhead of maintaining the infrastructure and the maintenance effort."
 

Cons

"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"CI/CD integration could be a little bit better. When there's a test and if you see that there are high response times in the test itself, it would be great to be able to send an alert. It would give a heads-up to the architect community or ops community."
"I faced issues with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud support when a problem took three to four months to resolve, which negatively impacted our project, especially when key team members were unavailable during leave periods."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"The initial setup is complex, but that is the nature of the technology."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"NetStorm is priced well when compared to many well-known tools."
"LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Performing Arts
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise30
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
As for the pricing of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), I find it quite expensive compared to other products in the market.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
Regarding improvements in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), the initial configuration where we have to set up orchestration is something that could be improved. If they make...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Oracle, Macy's, Redbox, art.com, Pronto Networks, A10 Networks, Renesas, San Jose Medical Group
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Find out what your peers are saying about Cavisson NetStorm vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.