OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs k6 Open Source comparison

k6 and OpenText are both solutions in the Load Testing Tools category. k6 is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.5, while OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.9. k6 holds a 3.9% mindshare in LTT, compared to OpenText’s 9.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of k6 users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

k6 Open Source

Read 2 k6 Open Source reviews

524 Views
383 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Read 43 OpenText LoadRunner Cloud reviews

2,992 Views
1,747 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

k6 Open Source

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

k6 Open Source and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud compete in the performance testing tools category. k6 Open Source is preferred by users for its transparent pricing model and ease of use, while OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is chosen for its comprehensive features and scalability, despite a higher price.

Features: k6 Open Source is known for its simplicity and efficiency in running load tests. It integrates with JavaScript, a feature favored by small and medium-sized businesses. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers a robust feature set, including extensive protocol support and advanced analytics capabilities, serving enterprises with complex testing needs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: k6 Open Source supports quick and easy deployment with minimal configuration, aided by a supportive community and substantial documentation. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers a cloud-based deployment model suited for larger teams, with dedicated customer service providing support throughout setup and execution phases.

Pricing and ROI: k6 Open Source is free, reducing initial setup costs and enhancing ROI for budget-conscious organizations. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud requires a higher investment, justified by its scalability and advanced features, appealing to businesses needing robust performance testing solutions who can invest more for long-term benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 849,686 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

k6 Open Source

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

9th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (10th)

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of k6 Open Source is 3.9%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 9.0%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Load Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

NalinGoonawardana

Principal Consultant ( Test automation - Performance testing) at TTC Global (TTC) at TTC at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services

One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter. While k6 is a powerful tool for performance testing, it leans heavily towards coding. Having a GUI, even if it is a low-code approach, could make it more accessible to a broader audience. It would be beneficial to strike a balance where basic tasks can be performed graphically through a user-friendly interface, while still allowing the flexibility for more complex operations through code, similar to how JMeter operates. This could enhance the user experience and make k6 more approachable for those who may not be as comfortable with scripting.

Read full review

AlexLogan

Senior Manager, Performance Engineering at Enel Group

Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement

The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.

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's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."

"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."

"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."

"A vital feature of the solution is its ability to compose realistic scenarios for performance testing"

"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."

"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."

"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."

"The beauty of LoadRunner Cloud is that we can use the load generator that is hosted by us on-premises, and we also have the option to use their hosted load generator. If it is a public-hosted application, we can also use their public-hosted load generator, but in our case, all our applications are hosted in our data center, so we are using the on-premise load generator. We have the option to deploy those load generators as we want."

"The solution can scale."

"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pros

Cons

"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."

"The product price could be more affordable."

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

"Its scripting features need improvement."

"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."

"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."

"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."

"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."

"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."

"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 solution’s price is considerably high."

"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 pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Media Company

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about k6 Open Source?

The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with k6 Open Source?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for k6 Open Source?

k6 Open Source is a powerful tool, especially for API-level performance testing. Its integration capabilities and ease of use make it promising for a wider audience.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.

See all answers

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

I would prefer it to be cheaper. On a scale of one to ten, the price is a five. It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter ( /products/apache-jmeter-reviews ), which is free.

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis NeoLoad vs k6 Open Source

Compared 52% of the time

Apache JMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 14% of the time

BlazeMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 14% of the time

Selenium HQ vs k6 Open Source

Compared 12% of the time

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs k6 Open Source

Compared 8% of the time

More k6 Open Source Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 26% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 25% of the time

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

Compared 20% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 18% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Load Testing Tools

March 2025

Download k6 Open Source product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

April 2025

Download OpenText LoadRunner Cloud product report

Also Known As

Load Impact

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load

Overview

Load Impact offers three main features:

Automated testing - Integrates into your CD pipeline with CI plug-ins or opt for full control with API/SDKs.
API testing - a powerful scripting environment where you can create as simple or complex API scenarios as you need.
Web & web app testing - easily load test your website or web app. Record user scenarios using our Chrome extension or proxy recorder and configure a test with just a few clicks - no programming required.

Do your performance and load testing in the cloud. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud makes it easy to plan, run, and scale performance tests without the need to deploy and manage infrastructure.

OpenText

Sample Customers

rackspace, salesforce.com, IBM, servicenow, Nasdaq, JWT

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant

Buyer's Guide

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs. k6 Open Source report.

See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Load 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.