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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText LoadRunner Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.2
IBM Engineering Test Management improves efficiency, reduces defects, integrates well with IBM software, enhancing workflow and providing cost savings.
Sentiment score
7.3
Users find OpenText LoadRunner Professional provides strong ROI by improving performance, reducing outages, and saving costs through efficiency.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.1
IBM Engineering Test Management's customer support is praised for responsiveness and effectiveness, with improvements in response times and satisfactory experiences.
Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText LoadRunner Professional's support is generally efficient but inconsistent, with users rating it between six to nine.
If I need to rate support from one to ten, I would say it is a nine.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
IBM Engineering Test Management scales smoothly for large organizations with thousands of users and test cases, including automated ones.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText LoadRunner Professional excels in scalable user loads and supports cloud integration, despite cost and resource challenges.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Engineering Test Management is reliable and stable, with good performance but occasionally impacted by server configuration and database space issues.
Sentiment score
7.7
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is highly stable and reliable, with occasional issues during large tests and minor compatibility challenges.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Engineering Test Management requires a user-friendly interface, enhanced usability, data handling, hierarchical structuring, and seamless integration with automated pipelines.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional requires simplified use, affordable pricing, better support, and improved integration with modern technologies and tools.
I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible.
 

Setup Cost

<p>IBM Engineering Test Management provides robust features and customization with flexible pricing, ideal for large enterprises needing comprehensive test management.</p>
LoadRunner's costly licensing is offset by comprehensive features, making it ideal for large-scale testing, despite cost-effective alternatives.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Engineering Test Management is praised for fast, reliable customizable workflows, and robust integrations, particularly in testing and tracking functionality.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers robust scripting, protocol support, scalability, and detailed analysis for efficient large-scale performance testing.
The most valuable feature of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is the analysis part that is really good, along with the support for multiple protocols.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (15th)
OpenText LoadRunner Profess...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is 12.7%, down from 13.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then put all the test cases, and put all the build code for the shared location. And then rational that shared location means that RQM has access to the shared location. So, when we execute, if a test case is automated, we can run it from RQM. We need to have the environment ready for it to execute. Once we have that, then we can select the task case. So, by clicking on one button, the other environment is automatically plugged in. Then test results will be automatically transferred back to our RQM. So, in RQM, we can view it, and it is integrated. So we can run the test and the automation from RQM, and the test results will come back. Azure DevOps first test case is there, but then we tried to use Selenium to do half automation. Still, we realized that it wouldn't have the integration. We could do something in the pipeline, but it fires the Selenium test automation code. But then the test results won't be brought back or added to AzureDesk DevOps. That's something that I do hope that there can be another other system that can have this kind of integration. RQM can be improved because it's not related to our server and could be faster. We need to find out how much database storage is needed and keep increasing it. We heard that the latest version of RQM can clean up some old ones and give the same test result. But that one feature we are yet to use. It's a setting that we can set up, and then it goes automatically or gives me the choice to do it manually.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,162 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
Healthcare Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Real Estate/Law Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those points remain similar and applicable. For future updates, I would like to see th...
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.