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
16th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
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 October 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 7.3%, up from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear LoadNinja is 2.1%, down from 2.2% 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)7.3%
SmartBear LoadNinja2.1%
Other90.6%
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

"For API testing, LoadRunner, getting the script developed in LoadRunner is very straightforward."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"We are able to connect and run tests from different locations with this tool."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis tool; it enables me to make a good, detailed analysis after a test run."
"The analytics and reporting features provide beneficial impacts on my organization, and the scalable testing environment is very beneficial for my performance testing processes."
"Our main use case for the product was load and stress testing. It helped us put the system under stress by injecting in multiple users, such as 5,000 users."
"The most powerful aspect is the ease of use."
"But for now, we are happy with what have been using."
"We are happy with the technical support."
"It's a very simple tool for performance testing."
"SmartBear LoadNinja is easy to use and implement."
 

Cons

"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
"The reporting could be a lot better. It's cumbersome."
"The technical support offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"Browser compatibility. IE is no longer the only browser out there, so providing users the choice of what browser to use would be great!"
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"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

"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
"The tool is very expensive."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"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."
"Certainly, the cost could be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
916,056 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%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
19%
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.
916,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.