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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 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
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
Tricentis Flood
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
16th
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 May 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.5%, up from 5.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Flood is 2.9%, up from 1.6% 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)6.5%
Tricentis Flood2.9%
Other90.6%
Load Testing Tools
 

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.
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

"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"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."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"The return on investment is immeasurable."
"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."
"We are able to connect and run tests from different locations with this tool."
"Performance Center innately provides you the ability to manage those assets."
"It's a very powerful tool."
"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."
"Their technical support is awesome."
"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

"Micro Focus's technical support could be more responsive."
"It's expensive, so could be cheaper."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"The solution is expensive."
"A room for improvement in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is that it should take multiple exhibitions for a particular scenario and have automatic trending for that. This will be a very useful feature that lets users look into how many exhibitions happened for the scenario and their performance, and you should be able to see the data within the Performance Center dashboard. For example, there's one scenario I'm focusing on multiple times in a month, and if I check five times, there's no way for me to see the trend and find out how it went with those five exhibitions. It would be great if the Performance Center has a view of all five exhibitions, particularly transaction by transaction, and how they happened. If Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise shows you the time trends, information about one exhibition to another, and how each performed, it'll be an immense feature, and that should be visible to every user. Reporting should be simpler in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. If I did a scenario with one exhibition now, and I did that scenario again, then I should be able to schedule that scenario for the exhibition, and if that scenario is executed multiple times, there should be the option to turn it into a single view that shows you all the transactions, how the performance was, what the trend graph is for a particular time, etc."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"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 is not in an optimal state."
"The performance of the tool needs to improve."
"The solution is quite immature, it is not in an optimal state."
"The solution lacks a little bit in the reporting features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
"We purchased the license via SAP."
"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."
"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"The price is really steep. It's an enterprise-level tool."
"The only positive point is it came free with my test automation tool."
"This solution is in the average price range compared to other testing tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 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 Enterprise74
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.
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: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.