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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Original Software Qualify 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th), Load Testing Tools (6th)
Original Software Qualify
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) and Original Software Qualify aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 6.5%, up 5.6% compared to last year.
Original Software Qualify, on the other hand, focuses on Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites, holds 0.9% mindshare, up 0.1% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.5%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.6%
Tricentis NeoLoad10.7%
Other69.2%
Performance Testing Tools
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Original Software Qualify0.9%
Jira11.2%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.5%
Other78.4%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2668566 - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Ensures high performance and adaptability while providing room for improved analytics and support
The analytics and reporting features can be improved, though they are good enough. If you have expertise, you can manage with what is included. However, it could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities. When considering areas for improvement in OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), there is a need for automated analysis and code-level support.
Konstantinos Tasiopoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Group Integration Tools Manager at TITAN
Flexible, multifunctional, and stable testing software with good technical support
I've been using the latest version of Original Software Qualify AQM. Over 100 users in our company use Original Software Qualify AQM. We only have two people in charge of its deployment and maintenance. This software is extensively used in our company. Personally, I recommend Original Software Qualify AQM to other people looking into implementing it. You can do a lot of things with this software. The support is very good. The communication is very good, and they also listen to problems raised. They add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues. It's a very good tool and I recommend it. We've seen a return on investment from this software. I'm rating Original Software Qualify AQM a nine out of ten, because of several reasons: It's very good software, it's a supportive company, and we have very good results from it. This software also minimizes the effort of UATs, and it also allows us to deploy whatever we want.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the analysis tool; it enables me to make a good, detailed analysis after a test run."
"The product is good, and the concept is good as well."
"It is used to empower our organisation in assisting customers, addressing their concerns, finding solutions, and providing value, thus making it possible to put customer success first, and in the process, focus on the business."
"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the Vuser protocols."
"The technology will do great things for you if you have a plan and a structure and you know what you want it to do for you."
"The user interface is fine."
"You can do a lot of things with this software; the support is very good, the communication is very good, they listen to problems raised, add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues, and we have seen a return on investment from this software."
"Flexible software with multiple functions, e.g. scenario deployment, new entity creation, workflow creation, etc. Technical support for this software is very good."
 

Cons

"It's expensive, so could be cheaper."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"Premium support is great, but before that, when we just had general support, it was not all that great."
"Features in the Web UI should be enhanced. We should be able to do everything from the Web UI without ever needing to download the old ActiveX ALM UI."
"I'd like to see a more shared data repository. They have their costs up."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports. Its reporting function needs improvement."
"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is a bit too high."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
"This solution can be expensive."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"This software is moderately priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise73
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
When discussing price, OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is very expensive, which I would represent by a rating of ten. The product carries maximum expense points.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Regarding negative sides or areas for improvement, I do not see any disadvantages so far. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) might have some drawbacks, but I did no...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
I always consider the purposes and use cases from an enterprise version perspective as a user of the product.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Qualify
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
CertainTeed, Marston's,  Edrington, Ageas,  iPERS.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.