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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs SmartBear LoadNinja comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 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

OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SmartBear LoadNinja
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
15th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.5%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.5%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.5%
Other91.0%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2668566 - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Ensures high performance and adaptability while providing room for improved analytics and support
The analytics and reporting features can be improved, though they are good enough. If you have expertise, you can manage with what is included. However, it could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities. When considering areas for improvement in OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), there is a need for automated analysis and code-level support.
Kapil Tarka - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Easy to use with good documentation and helpful support
It's a new tool when I compare it with LoadViewer and HP LoadRunner. It needs time to mature. For example, it needs to improve concurrency. When you run a test suite, your scripts will generate some test data. If we are running a banking application and then we are running a full end-to-end suite, there are many actions that need testing. There's a lot of data getting generated. There should be a variable that we can store for later in our later test cases. We need data management and dynamic data generation to be able to capture the data which is generated.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"With LoadRunner, 80% of the cases will be supported."
"With the help of HP Performance Center and LoadRunner, we were able to critically evaluate the applications performance and stability, and were assured that each application that was released into production was performing better and meeting all SLAs, including transactional response times and system and platform resource utilization."
"Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration allows for quick comparison of monitoring and performance results, a feature I highly appreciate."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"We are able to run performance tests for Asia, EU, and the US from a centralized controller where each team can come together in their respective time zones, build and run the tests, as a test manager can review, and suggest various improvements along with infrastructure teams."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"The most powerful aspect is the ease of use."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"But for now, we are happy with what have been using."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
 

Cons

"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"Support is very poor. We've had a very frustrating experience with them."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"It needs time to mature."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced. It requires attention. Clients have expressed dissatisfaction with the price."
"On a smaller scale, there will be no budget issues, but as we expand to a larger user base, I believe we will face some pricing challenges."
"It needs time to mature."
"As we ran the test, we couldn't see the real-time results of how the solution behaved for 200 to 400 virtual users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is very expensive."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"This solution can be expensive."
"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
University
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise74
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
When discussing price, OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is very expensive, which I would represent by a rating of ten. The product carries maximum expense points.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Regarding negative sides or areas for improvement, I do not see any disadvantages so far. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) might have some drawbacks, but I did no...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
I always consider the purposes and use cases from an enterprise version perspective as a user of the product.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
SmartBear LoadComplete
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Falafel Software
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. SmartBear LoadNinja and other solutions. Updated: May 2026.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.