Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Application Quality Management vs OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.8
Users acknowledge OpenText Application Quality Management's complexity but appreciate its efficiency, cost savings, improved traceability, and enhanced performance.
Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering enhances reliability, reduces downtime, prevents crashes, and offers a 200% ROI by identifying system issues early.
It acts as an enabler for effective test and program management.
I have seen an ROI from this tool, as it provides enormous value.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Application Quality Management's service varies; some experience responsiveness and satisfaction, while others note delays and inconsistencies.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering's support quality varies, with experiences ranging from excellent service to slow responses and unhelpful documentation.
Technical support has been excellent.
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
I am mostly happy with the technical support from OpenText ALM _ Quality Center.
The customer service and technical support for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is reasonable, not impressive, but provides adequate assistance.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText Application Quality Management is scalable yet may face licensing and custom workflow challenges in large-scale deployments.
Sentiment score
7.6
LoadRunner Enterprise scales well and flexibly, but faces challenges with memory use and license costs impacting adoption.
OpenText ALM Quality Center is definitely scalable.
I rate the scalability of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) as ten when using a scale from one to ten, with one being low.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Application Quality Management is stable with minimal downtime; updates improve glitches, yet infrastructure occasionally impacts performance.
Sentiment score
7.4
LoadRunner Enterprise is generally stable but may face occasional issues due to infrastructure, version upgrades, and maintenance needs.
From a stability standpoint, OpenText ALM Quality Center has been pretty good.
However, it remains quite stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Application Quality Management needs improved integration, UI, reporting, reduced cost, and enhanced usability for better performance and flexibility.
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise struggles with UI, integration, reporting, support, and pricing, leading users to consider alternatives.
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.
HPLM has one of the best UIs compared to other test management tools, allowing for efficient navigation between test pieces, test folders, test suites, and test execution.
It could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Application Quality Management’s pricing is high, suited for large enterprises, with flexible options and economical cloud solutions available.
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is costly but offers value, requiring careful planning to optimize virtual user license expenses.
It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
It is neither cheap nor expensive.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText ALM Quality Management offers robust reporting, flexible management, integrations, and real-time updates, enhancing efficiency and coordination.
LoadRunner Enterprise enhances testing efficiency with scalability, advanced reporting, integration, and real-time analysis, benefiting global application performance management.
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
The best features of this solution are easy scripting and broad platform support.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Application Qualit...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (5th), Test Management Tools (1st)
OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th), Load Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Application Quality Management is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 5.4%, up 5.2% compared to last year.
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 5.8% mindshare, down 6.1% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.
VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
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 a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Siemens and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: August 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.