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 May 18, 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 July 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.8%, down from 6.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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

"I like how you can make modifications to the script on LoadRunner Enterprise. You don't have to go into the IDE itself."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"Support is nice, quick, and responsive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"With LoadRunner Enterprise, doing various types of performance testing, load testing, and automation testing has been very helpful for some of the teams."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
 

Cons

"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward."
"It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"They had wanted to change the GUI to improve the look and feel. However, since that time, we see a lot of hanging issues."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"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."
"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"This solution can be expensive."
"The tool is very expensive."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"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.
864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Government
13%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
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: July 2025.
864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.