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

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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
7.4
Users report cost savings and improved clarity with OpenText Core Performance Engineering, citing significant annual reductions in testing expenses.
Sentiment score
7.8
ReadyAPI delivers efficient and cost-effective API testing, integrating seamlessly, reducing effort, and providing significant value for enterprises.
The ROI is not necessarily cost savings. Sometimes a customer wants to use OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, or it's the only tool that will solve the problem depending on the application.
LoadRunner Cloud helps with risk elimination by reducing performance degradation in production, ensuring a better end-user experience.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.4
Opinions on OpenText Core Performance Engineering's support are mixed, with praise for customer service but issues with response times.
Sentiment score
6.6
ReadyAPI support is knowledgeable and prompt, but lacks phone support, causing delays, especially across time zones.
I faced issues with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud support when a problem took three to four months to resolve, which negatively impacted our project, especially when key team members were unavailable during leave periods.
It's important to note that OpenText has recently taken over Micro Focus.
SmartBear had an ALM tool that helped manage project documentation, including Jira-related specifications, test plans, and test cases.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
OpenText Core Performance Engineering scales efficiently for varied needs, handling up to two million users, with notable flexibility and support.
Sentiment score
6.8
ReadyAPI is scalable and efficient for large API volumes but lacks flexibility, facing resource and team synchronization challenges.
It is very scalable, and on the cloud, it's even more scalable, potentially unlimited.
With load generators available, it is easily scalable to meet our needs.
The solution is highly scalable, which is its main feature.
ReadyAPI's performance testing capabilities can impact API scalability assessments.
I rate ReadyAPI between five to six for scalability due to complexities associated with scripting.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
<p>OpenText Core Performance Engineering is reliable with minor issues, quickly resolved by responsive R&amp;D and customer support teams.</p>
Sentiment score
7.2
ReadyAPI is generally stable but users may encounter minor issues with larger tasks, configuration, and licensing challenges.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is extremely stable for our use case.
Once all configurations and preparations are done, it is very stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Core Performance Engineering struggles with load patterns, reporting, network simulation, support speed, UI design, and agile integration.
Users request enhanced tool integration, performance, UI, version control, protocol support, cloud integration, and improved testing features in ReadyAPI.
In-depth analysis tools found in the standalone LoadRunner analysis, such as graph merging and setting granularity, would be beneficial.
The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations.
I expect an improvement in the cloud location offering to better serve local applications, particularly to enhance testing accuracy for users in regions like Thailand.
One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI.
I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Core Performance Engineering provides flexible, usage-based pricing, supporting multiple protocols, justifying costs for enterprise-level performance testing.
ReadyAPI offers flexible pricing from $1,000 to $6,000 annually, praised for comprehensive API solutions and modular licensing.
It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter, which is free.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing is flexible, offering a more affordable solution compared to the more expensive on-premise LoadRunner.
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs.
The pricing of ReadyAPI is reasonable, considering its functionality compared to other tools in the market.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Core Performance Engineering offers scalable, easy-to-use load testing with integration, automation, anomaly detection, and no maintenance required.
ReadyAPI excels in API testing with user-friendly features, strong integration, smart assertions, and comprehensive performance and security capabilities.
A significant difference is in its depth of analysis.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud can scale in a cloud-based environment to support up to ten thousand concurrent users without capacity loss, which is not possible with on-premise solutions on personal machines.
We can monitor CPU and memory utilization, and response times.
It also aids in faster feedback to developers, allowing them to implement developments in a sprint without the need for extensive testing afterwards, thus improving our time to market metrics.
I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing.
ReadyAPI is valuable for web service automation and allowing us to generate test cases and automate processes.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Core Performance E...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (6th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.6%, up from 9.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 2.9%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jyoti Ranjan Behera - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly features facilitate monitoring while support could be more responsive
I am satisfied with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as a product, but the ticket resolution time is concerning. The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations. Compared to previous support, I notice that while experts previously resolved issues immediately, current experts take more time to resolve issues, which is the main challenge we are facing. They are now lacking regional support, which takes more time than it used to. My suggestions for improvements to OpenText LoadRunner Cloud would be to have specific experts available who can resolve issues more quickly, as delays can impact project timelines significantly.
Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless integration with cloud environments supports backend projects while seeking AWS Lambda enhancements
ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner. It helps extend our functional tests, even though we are not heavily using performance testing. It supports a wide range of protocols such as Kafka and GRPC, depending on the project. It also aids in faster feedback to developers, allowing them to implement developments in a sprint without the need for extensive testing afterwards, thus improving our time to market metrics.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing is flexible, offering a more affordable solution compared to the more expensive on-premise LoadRunner. The hourly usage model allows cost-saving when used rightly.
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
In native teams and cloud environments, there is room for improvement. I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor. These are more so points from my wishlis...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.