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

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Tricentis Flood comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 8, 2026

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 Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
87
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th)
Tricentis Flood
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.8%, up from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Flood is 2.8%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.8%
Tricentis Flood2.8%
Other90.4%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VK
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Performance testing has supported web app peak analysis but needs better setup and smarter scripting
Regarding points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringing AI features into the tool, it could save maximum time in scripting or make scripting effortless, particularly in correlation, which is where the complexity involved in script development exists. If any AI features could replace or eliminate more manual work on the correlation part, that is where we could see a game-changing improvement for the tool. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) can be positioned very well in the market. However, I see that the basic correlations are only being handled by the autocorrelation engine in the LoadRunner tool, and I would expect a few improvements to handle even complex correlation problems so that the tool can be appropriately positioned compared to their peers.
Test Process Consultant - PeerSpot reviewer
SME (Subject Matter Expert) at Maersk
Need improvements ,but has cloud and on-premises options
The solution is not in an optimal state. During POC, we analyzed tool is kept on upgrading. The patch deployment is happening in parallel, things that are working today are not working tomorrow. We eventually sorted it out with help of CSM. We integrated this tool with other software such as Azure client, but many times without a valid or visible reason, the connectivity was breaking. Improvement suggestions- The dashboard creation for the reporting needs to be easier. Currently, the solution does not support multiple script executions and we would like to see support for this.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"LoadRunner's UI is project-convenient, allowing easier simulation of real-time scenarios and producing comprehensive reports that are effortless to read."
"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."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The analytics and reporting features provide beneficial impacts on my organization, and the scalable testing environment is very beneficial for my performance testing processes."
"Previously, we had different physical machines for each controller, and then we shifted to Performance Center, which allows users to log into a single instance and manage all other controllers from there."
"For me, it's the fact that I can train my team on a single tool; it really is kind of our Swiss Army Knife in that it can handle so many different types of protocols and technologies, and I don't have to train my team on multiple tools to handle each of those."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"You can utilize this tool on the cloud, and also access application on-premises. That is a very good part of the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Java, where we can quickly code what we need."
 

Cons

"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."
"It has to be fully integrated into pipelines, it needs to be DevOps friendly."
"Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despite its advantages, leading them to alternatives like JMeter and RPT."
"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"I'd like to see a more shared data repository. They have their costs up."
"It would be nice if the Citrix protocol could be updated."
"We used an implementation strategy to deploy the solution, not because of the tools, but mainly because of the scripting part of the tool."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"The solution lacks a little bit in the reporting features."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"We got a very good deal. We are happy with that. We have 5,000 licenses."
"I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."
"The price is really steep. It's an enterprise-level tool."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"ROI is 200%."
"The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise76
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 points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
My use case for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is related to enterprise twenty six, which we are going to upgrade now. We focus on web applications.
Do you recommend Tricentis Flood?
Tricentis Flood is the kind of versatile load and performance testing solution that my organization and I cannot help but recommend. It is recognized by companies across a wide variety of fields as...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Flood IO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Nike, heroku, Soulcycle, NEC, boston.com, Typeform, Xero, Telus
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. Tricentis Flood and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.