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

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

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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 Professional Perfo...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
2nd
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
11th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
16th
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 October 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 16.6%, up from 13.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RadView WebLOAD is 3.6%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)16.6%
RadView WebLOAD3.6%
Other79.8%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Performance Testing Specialist at Canadian Pacific Railway
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
Vadim Urintsov - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Tester / Quality Assurance Analyst at Bitnami
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've always been impressed by the versatility and plain power of this testing tool."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"It is quite a good tool, it supports a medical protocol which we tried to explore in other products but none of them had, and overall it is pretty simple and easy to use."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"LoadRunner has easy usability right now, and it's pretty much documented on the features, and has a how-to-do use of videos, learning materials."
"The implementation was very straightforward and not an issue."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting; it is interesting, intuitive, and we can do some parameterization."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"They are the best of all of the vendors I deal with, hands down."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"The ability to conceptualize the experience for users is great, the price as the bang for your buck is good, the user interface is quite user friendly, and the graphics make it easy to follow and are easy to identify."
 

Cons

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"Network monitoring."
"Micro Focus has two separate products for web and mobile applications, which means you have to invest in both."
"In terms of improvement, it lacks mobile testing features present in some competitors, like GitMatters, which I find valuable."
"Pricing is the only thing which make people think many times before purchasing this product."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"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."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"Pricing depends on our choices because it depends on what type of protocol we are getting, what type of licensing we are getting, and what kind of relationships we have with HP and Micro Focus."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"It is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"We purchased a license for two years."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
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
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise67
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I work only with the performance testing tools and not with OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) for mobile and web applications. With performance testing, I am t...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I can provide additional advice after consulting with my team. I am open to being contacted via email for any clarifications about my review. I rate OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (L...
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: October 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.