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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Oracle Application Testing Suite 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (13th)
Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th), Functional Testing Tools (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 2.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 3.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Oracle Application Testing Suite3.0%
IBM Engineering Test Management2.6%
Other94.4%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
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.
Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In the latest version, Global Configuration is the most promising feature as it allows the user to maintain different versions of the same artifact in different streams."
"It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need. It has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability."
"Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"The product is very fast, very reliable as a solution, and well structured so you can customize it within your business workflows."
"The technical support from IBM is very good."
"Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert."
"The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"Now I feel its the best tool to automate any of the Oracle Products, which include Oracle EBS Applications, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel, Adobe Flex, ADF applications, etc.."
"Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"Overall, Oracle Application Testing Suite is very easy to use and you can create a good framework for developing and testing."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"The best feature of this and Load Test is simplicity."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
 

Cons

"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"Support of parameter needs to be easier."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"In a test plan, all of the test cases are flat and there's no hierarchy in it."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"Integration capabilities with other vendors' tools should improve."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"Performance is slow as compared to other tools like QTP."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
"The tool runs out of memory when the recording flows are long and involve many screens despite increasing the memory settings for OpenScript."
"WebForms works fine, but scripting in the EBS forms option isn't very consistent and stable."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licenses of these tools (the whole CLM package) is very costly as compared to other vendors' tools."
"Each license includes 12 months of customer support. A free 90-day trial of the software is also available."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
OATS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.