OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

OpenText and Progress Software are both solutions in the Load Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.5, while Progress Software is ranked #14. OpenText holds a 9.2% mindshare in LTT, compared to Progress Software’s 2.1% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText Core Performance E...

Read 46 OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) reviews

2,808 Views
2,387 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

1,438 Views
259 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Performance E...

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and Telerik Test Studio compete in the performance testing space. Data comparisons suggest OpenText is favored for comprehensive testing capabilities, while Telerik gains preference for its intuitive features.

Features: OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) provides robust load-testing capabilities with high scalability and extensive protocol coverage. It supports large-scale scenarios and complex environments. Telerik Test Studio emphasizes end-to-end testing features, simplicity, and ease of integration with other applications, offering flexibility and user-friendly tools.

Room for Improvement: OpenText requires improvements in deployment ease and customer support responsiveness. A more intuitive user interface might enhance its appeal. Telerik Test Studio could benefit from expanding its protocol support and enhancing its reporting capabilities. It would also be advantageous to strengthen its robustness in handling larger-scale tests.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Telerik Test Studio is commended for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service, which contribute to a positive user experience. OpenText Core Performance Engineering might require more technical expertise for deployment, with customer service noted as adequate but less responsive compared to Telerik.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Core Performance Engineering involves potentially higher setup costs due to its feature-rich platform, offering significant ROI for large-scale environments. Telerik Test Studio offers a clearer pricing structure with lower setup costs, targeting smaller teams or projects seeking faster ROI. OpenText attracts larger enterprises, while Telerik provides cost-effectiveness for smaller teams.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 peers since 2012

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...

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (5th)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Load Testing Tools

14th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (24th), Regression Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (24th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.2%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 2.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)	9.2%
Telerik Test Studio	2.1%
Other	88.7%

Load Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Jyoti Ranjan Behera

Performance Test Analyst at Sensata Technologies

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.

Read full review

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Keeping up with DevOps, thus the best feature of StormRunner is that we don't have to build and maintain infrastructure anymore."

"The ability to provision the load so it comes from multiple geographies across the world."

"I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud a ten out of ten for scalability."

"Before StormRunner Load, we didn’t have a clear developer roadmap, and now it’s very clear where we should invest, our weakest links, and what we need to do to strengthen weak links."

"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."

"The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. The process starts in the background. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. I"

"Running a 300,000 test was very easy using StormRunner, as we just had to upload the script and create scenarios for 300,000 and run the test in 20 minutes."

"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pros

"The way it identifies elements is good."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"The performance and load testing are very good."

Cons

"Sometimes, you are utilizing one of the low generators, then all of a sudden if you discontinue from one project, it actually deletes the entire low generator."

"I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check."

"I have faced several problems using the cloud in different locations, so I rate the stability a six out of ten."

"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."

"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."

"The monitoring abilities were lacking."

"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."

"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) cons

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."

"The solution is expensive."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."

"The solution’s price is considerably high."

"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."

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

10%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	30

No data available

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

As for the pricing of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), I find it quite expensive compared to other products in the market.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

Regarding improvements in OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud), the initial configuration where we have to set up orchestration is something that could be improved. If they make...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 13% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 9% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 7% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 6% of the time

UBIK Load Pack vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 4% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)

March 2026

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) report

Download OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 2026

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

OpenText Core Performance Engineering offers scalable and efficient load testing using a cloud-based architecture, eliminating the need for physical infrastructure and supporting a wide range of users and testing scenarios.

OpenText Core Performance Engineering supports seamless integration with popular tools and delivers real-time anomaly detection and performance insights. With an intuitive interface, it supports scripting protocols and provides tests for cloud-hosted and on-premise applications. The platform streamlines performance testing and infrastructure management, addressing the needs of diverse sectors like banking, retail, and IT. However, it requires enhancements in reporting, integration, documentation, and support for older scripts.

What are the key features?

Rapid Test Setup: Quickly initiate performance tests without extensive configuration efforts.
Scalability: Supports numerous users without loss of performance across global regions.
Global Load Distribution: Allows effective load distribution across different geographies.
Seamless Tool Integration: Integrates smoothly with SiteScope, New Relic, and others.
Real-time Anomaly Detection: Instantly identifies performance anomalies for immediate action.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Minimal Infrastructure Management: Reduces the need for physical resources, saving costs and effort.
Enhanced Application Responsiveness: Ensures applications remain stable under peak loads.
Increased Testing Efficiency: Streamlines testing processes for faster execution.
Cloud-Based Flexibility: Offers dynamic resource allocation to accommodate varying test needs.
Comprehensive Performance Insights: Delivers valuable analytics for optimizing applications.

Organizations in banking, retail, and IT sectors implement OpenText Core Performance Engineering for performance testing, integrating it within CI/CD pipelines. It suits public server application testing and enterprise systems like SAP and Salesforce, meeting diverse industry demands for app stability and responsiveness testing.

OpenText

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2026

Free Report: OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio report.

See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Load Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.