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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs RadView WebLOAD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 24, 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 Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)5.8%
RadView WebLOAD2.1%
Other92.1%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
Vadim Urintsov - PeerSpot reviewer
An excellent solution for graph testing on programming software
Our primary use case for the solution is for graph testing on programming software The information provided via the solution and the dashboard is valuable. Additionally, it's interesting as you can view inside information integrated and see the WebLOAD with APM. There is no analytical dashboard…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"We can book load generators."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"The user interface is fine."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is easy to use and has flexibility that allows it to be used on a variety of applications."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
 

Cons

"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"Canned reports are always a challenge and a question with customers because customers want to see sexy reports."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten."
"It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
"The price is a bit too high."
"It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
"There is an ROI. What LoadRunner does, is it prevents failures when there are many, many concurrent users in the systems of a company."
"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."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
"We purchased a license for two years."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Government
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Healthcare Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
The price of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), including pricing, licensing, and setup cost, is reasonable. It is neither cheap nor expensive.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
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 mod...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. RadView WebLOAD and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.