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

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

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
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
13th
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 September 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 7.1%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.2%, up from 2.1% 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)7.1%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.2%
Other90.7%
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

"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"It's the tool for performance testing, and it's definitely the industry leader that I've been using for years."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"The main features are the ability to customize the product configuration and the customization to adapt with the customer environment, additionally, the product flexibility and stability are also valuable."
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"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."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
"The most powerful aspect is the ease of use."
"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 solution is expensive."
"Storing the results of our tests requires the use of a lot of memory in our data center."
"Reports from Performance Center need to be improved."
"The debugging feature needs to include graphs."
"It has to be fully integrated into pipelines, it needs to be DevOps friendly."
"I'd rate the scalability a six out of ten. The main reason is that it's a very expensive application. Other companies might not be able to afford it. For example, if we need to test an application with 10,000 concurrent users, the license can cost a lot of money. That's where OpenText tools shoot themselves in the foot compared to other tools. Because of the price, many companies, like one I used to work for, decided not to renew their licenses and switched to open-source testing tools."
"It's expensive, so could be cheaper."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"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."
"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."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced. It requires attention. Clients have expressed dissatisfaction with the price."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
"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."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"ROI is 200%."
"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."
"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"There is an ROI. What LoadRunner does, is it prevents failures when there are many, many concurrent users in the systems of a company."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
912,930 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
17%
University
11%
Construction Company
11%
 

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 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 bringi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
My use case for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is related to enterprise twenty six, which we are going to upgrade now. We focus on web applications.
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: September 2026.
912,930 professionals have used our research since 2012.