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

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Core Performance E...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (18th), Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 7.8%, down 9.3% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web, on the other hand, focuses on Mobile App Testing Tools, holds 6.0% mindshare, up 3.6% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)7.8%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)16.6%
Tricentis NeoLoad13.9%
Other61.699999999999996%
Performance Testing Tools
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web6.0%
Tricentis Tosca23.0%
OpenText Functional Testing21.4%
Other49.6%
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Centralized cloud testing has improved global load generation and real-time performance insights
The most valuable features I have found in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) are that everything is online and centralized, so I do not need to go anywhere to check the configuration and everything. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)'s advanced analytics help identify performance bottlenecks because whenever we are executing the test scripts, it shows a good analytics view where we can simply check which APIs are not performing well. The cloud-based load generators in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) have benefited my testing setup because we can generate the load across the globe, which was previously a little bit difficult on the on-premises version. The user interface in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is intuitive and this will be easy to communicate and collaborate amongst the team also because sharing the online URL with the team, they can simply check the analysis and everything.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has reduced the need for scripting knowledge and enabled broader test script creation
The ease of use and zero cost are what I appreciate most about this product. The key for us is their Digital Lab service. With Digital Lab service, you have no control over those devices; you are simply getting an iOS device and using it as it is. Many of our customers are using InTune and other deployment services that have security settings on them. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web allows us to test with our customers' setup of their device and ensure that the scripts will run against it versus a cloud service that does not have any of their security sizing and cannot truly mimic a real-life scenario. The overall framework of UFT in general helps reduce manual testing efforts for us. The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant. By being able to develop scripts that way, you prevent having to know VB script. I have testers who create manual scripts and are already running the test manually; now they can perform that same effort in UFT One, and it creates the scripts so they do not have to recreate them every time. We do use the product's API integrations at some customers, though I am not as familiar with it as some of my colleagues are. My understanding is that for free, you can set up virtual APIs that do not exist yet, allowing you to mimic that behavior even before your APIs have been built. That is a huge selling feature and a significant zero-cost feature in being able to run your API tests even before the API is finished.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Even though the cost is expensive, there are good features when compared to all other tools."
"The most useful features of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud include getting load through the Performance Center, which is part of the cloud version, where we can monitor CPU and memory utilization, and response times."
"Customer Service is immaculate."
"I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud a ten out of ten for scalability."
"It is very easy to set up a load test, to start it and end it, and it is valuable that it is very easy to use."
"From end-to-end, starting from creating the load scenarios, to running them, and then reporting, LoadRunner is the best tool."
"The solution can scale."
"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."
"This is a solution that's easy to use and it also gives us the possibility to use real devices connected either on the Mobile Center server or on our own computers and it works with both iOS and Android devices."
"The pricing is great."
"They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products."
"We evaluated other mobile testing solutions and found this to be superior to all of them."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"In general, in my opinion, Mobile Center is a good product that allows us to do everything we need to automate application testing for mobile."
 

Cons

"The support team provides delayed responses."
"The product price could be more affordable."
"I think the report page could be improved, although we have used the reporting feature."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"I don't know of any features that should be added. The solution isn't lacking anything at this point."
"During the initial days of high concurrency testing (300,000 and 600,000) we had issues with the StormRunner infrastructure e.g. graphs disappeared in the middle of a test, and HP had to give an online fix."
"When you start a test, it takes times to initiate."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."
"I think the biggest issues that I've seen, and this is a personal view of mine, is that most of the HPE products have a common look and feel to them."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."
"LoadRunner always had expensive pricing. At my company, we used to evaluate LoadRunner, but we stuck with Silk Performer because its pricing was always better in the past. I do feel that I got a fair deal this time. Our value-added reseller and our sales guy worked hard to give us a fair deal. I feel that we got a fair deal. We did not go for the pay-as-you-go deal. I did an upfront package. I prefer that. I want to know what my costs are."
"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"The product could be more affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Non Profit
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing shows it is very high and very costly.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) can be improved by incorporating code improvements. I would add that it reduces the initial setup complexity, improves the learning curve op...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I do have experience with OpenText products and OpenText ALM. I have been using ALM Quality Center, which has had a few names for it over time, but it is the old Quality Center that was then rename...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: September 2026.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.