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 Jun 3, 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
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
86
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 August 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.9%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.3%, up from 2.0% 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)6.9%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.3%
Other90.8%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VK
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Performance testing has supported web app peak analysis but needs better setup and smarter scripting
Regarding points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringing AI features into the tool, it could save maximum time in scripting or make scripting effortless, particularly in correlation, which is where the complexity involved in script development exists. If any AI features could replace or eliminate more manual work on the correlation part, that is where we could see a game-changing improvement for the tool. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) can be positioned very well in the market. However, I see that the basic correlations are only being handled by the autocorrelation engine in the LoadRunner tool, and I would expect a few improvements to handle even complex correlation problems so that the tool can be appropriately positioned compared to their peers.
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

"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"Enterprise-level load tests have a great analysis module for results."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"The analytics and reporting features provide beneficial impacts on my organization, and the scalable testing environment is very beneficial for my performance testing processes."
"For us, the features we value and use the most are web and HTTP support."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"But for now, we are happy with what have been using."
"The most powerful aspect is the ease of use."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"We are happy with the technical support."
 

Cons

"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"The solution is expensive."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"Running virtual users especially with a huge number is a very challenging task. The load generators may over utilize its resources (CPU/ memory) due to improper default configurations, or improper use of LoadRunner and Performance Center."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"Support is very poor. We've had a very frustrating experience with them."
"In Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, I need to spend a lot of time training people, while on other low-code or no-code platforms, I need not invest that much time."
"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."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced. It requires attention. Clients have expressed dissatisfaction with the price."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"The tool is very expensive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
907,731 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Construction Company
10%
University
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise75
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: June 2026.
907,731 professionals have used our research since 2012.