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

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

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Core Performance E...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (24th), Regression Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 10.5%, up from 8.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load 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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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"
"The solution can scale."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."
"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."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"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 way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
 

Cons

"I have faced several problems using the cloud in different locations, so I rate the stability a six out of ten."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"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."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"Improvements to the reporting would be good."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"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."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"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."
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
"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."
"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."
"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."
"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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...
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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.