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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 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 Professional Perfo...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
RadView WebLOAD
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
12th
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 November 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 13.1%, up from 12.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 2.3%, 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 Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.1%
RadView WebLOAD2.3%
Other84.6%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kulveer Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports AI-enabled load testing and aids in preventing unexpected outages by ensuring infrastructure sizing aligns with the anticipated load
The challenge lies in the time-consuming manual coding and testing. It takes a while to understand it, repeat it with the managers or a business analyst, and then share the reports with stakeholders, and the whole process takes time. So it would be beneficial for us if there is some kind of a dashboard where you can have different rules. A dashboard with different rules would be beneficial for quick approvals and deployment, reducing the need for extensive meetings and email communication. It could be improved in some areas to support the latest web technologies. For example, LoadRunner could be improved to better support single-page applications (SPAs). Another way to improve LoadRunner would be to add better support for testing SPAs. Now, most people are going for WAV 2.0. Most of the applications are single-page applications where the browser is not refreshing.
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 solution supports a lot of protocols."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"What we like the most is that it integrates with UC."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
 

Cons

"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."
"I recently just got to see LoadRunner Developer, but it is still not fully developed to use."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"
"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."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."
"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"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.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Government
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Performing Arts
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I have mentioned many advantages about this product, but to discuss disadvantages or areas that could be improved, I would need to consult with my engineers who are working on it. So far I have not...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs. RadView WebLOAD and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.