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

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis NeoLoad 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
7.4
Users report cost savings and improved clarity with OpenText Core Performance Engineering, citing significant annual reductions in testing expenses.
Sentiment score
6.8
SmartBear TestComplete automation saves time, enhances client satisfaction, and boosts efficiency, with annual savings of approximately $10,000.
Sentiment score
7.0
Tricentis NeoLoad delivers significant ROI by enhancing testing efficiency, saving costs, and quickly addressing performance issues.
LoadRunner Cloud helps with risk elimination by reducing performance degradation in production, ensuring a better end-user experience.
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.
Once set up, only one person is needed to handle all tasks, reducing the requirement for multiple personnel.
 

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
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete's customer support is knowledgeable but inconsistent, with delays and unresolved issues needing faster escalation and responses.
Sentiment score
7.6
Tricentis NeoLoad offers responsive, expert support, praised for flexibility, though some experience occasional delays; overall satisfaction remains high.
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.
 

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
7.4
SmartBear TestComplete is scalable and adaptable, with flexible scripting, but may require licensing for wider deployment.
Sentiment score
7.5
Tricentis NeoLoad efficiently scales for varying user volumes, supporting large applications with high user satisfaction and deployment flexibility.
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.
 

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
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete generally stable, but users report crashes, memory leaks, and HTML5 testing delays in certain scenarios.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tricentis NeoLoad is generally stable, though large-scale performance tests and environment settings may cause minor stability issues.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Core Performance Engineering struggles with load patterns, reporting, network simulation, support speed, UI design, and agile integration.
SmartBear TestComplete faces challenges in object recognition, integrations, licensing, performance, and support across browsers and mobile devices.
NeoLoad needs protocol support, UI improvements, affordable pricing, better documentation, and refined reporting for large projects.
The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations.
It would also be convenient if there were options to convert scripts from competitor tools like NeoLoad to LoadRunner.
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.
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature.
The effect of the new license policy is that NeoLoad becomes more and more unattractive for smaller companies, and only bigger companies are interested or find the license fee fair.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Core Performance Engineering provides flexible, usage-based pricing, supporting multiple protocols, justifying costs for enterprise-level performance testing.
SmartBear TestComplete's pricing and licensing receive mixed reviews, seen as both reasonable and costly depending on usage and modules.
Tricentis NeoLoad is seen as cost-effective and flexible, adaptable to business needs, but costs can rise with expanded use.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing is flexible, offering a more affordable solution compared to the more expensive on-premise LoadRunner.
It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter, which is free.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Core Performance Engineering offers scalable, easy-to-use load testing with integration, automation, anomaly detection, and no maintenance required.
SmartBear TestComplete excels in cross-platform automation, integration, and support for multiple languages, enhancing automated testing efficiency and maintenance.
Tricentis NeoLoad offers easy script creation, integration, and comprehensive analysis for effective performance testing across various environments.
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.
The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality.
Most graphs can be configured with drag-and-drop, which is handy, and you get graphs suitable for reporting issues.
 

Mindshare comparison

Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)9.3%
Apache JMeter16.1%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.6%
Other61.0%
Performance Testing Tools
Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SmartBear TestComplete5.9%
Tricentis Tosca20.4%
OpenText Functional Testing8.7%
Other65.0%
Test Automation Tools
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tricentis NeoLoad12.9%
Apache JMeter16.1%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.6%
Other57.4%
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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.
Dirk O. Schweier - PeerSpot reviewer
Key reports enable insightful analysis and useful for continuous performance validation
Since the ownership of NeoLoad has changed to Tricentis, they have done a very poor job with license management. They changed the license policy very abruptly. The effect of the new license policy is that NeoLoad becomes more and more unattractive for smaller companies, and only bigger companies are interested or find the license fee fair. The smallest license fee is very high, and there is no starter package at the moment.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
872,029 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise32
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

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...
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-...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to imp...
Do you recommend Tricentis NeoLoad?
I highly recommend Tricentis NeoLoad for companies that are in need of a versatile load and performance testing tool....
What is your primary use case for Neotys NeoLoad?
My relationship with Tricentis NeoLoad is that I implemented it during a trial period, and then they implemented some...
What do you like most about Tricentis NeoLoad?
The most valuable feature of Tricentis NeoLoad for us has been its ability to easily monitor all the load generators ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
No data available
NeoLoad, Neotys NeoLoad
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Dell, H&R Block, Best Buy, Orange, Verizon Wireless, ING, Mazda, Siemens, University of Oxford
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: October 2025.
872,029 professionals have used our research since 2012.