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

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs OpenText Application Quality Management 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

IBM Rational Performance Te...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 3.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.4%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
IBM Rational Performance Tester3.4%
Other87.2%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Xcelliti
Supports web and mobile applications, very scalable, very stable, and wonderful support
There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Virtual Users."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"With each new version, the tool gets better and better features."
"It's definitely helped in scaling the performance of our application."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"It has sped up our regression testing cycle almost three times what it is if we do it manually."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"We have a pretty strong emphasis on quality, so ALM is our gold source repository for quality."
"The most valuable features of OpenText ALM include its integration with the automation landscape, the ability to capture requirements and map them to test cases, and the capability to schedule runs through ALM."
"You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between."
"The company needed an option to integrate all our open source tools like JIRA, Jenkins, LFT, UFT, etc., and Quality Center does this."
"With the addition of BPT (Business Process Testing), QC along with QTP has been the choice for test automation in most of the IT businesses."
"It was really good, customizable, and easy to use."
 

Cons

"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"It is complex for a novice."
"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester."
"We had open many PMRs for problems found in the products, and I'm not sure if all of them have been fixed."
"It was complex."
"The performance of this product is really poor, and there is no dashboard (reports) for the groups or users on the home page."
"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem."
"Also, on and off, we have had some issues with the operation itself where the operation is not able to run the test or something. We have to go back and forth with the vendor and HPE (now Micro Focus) to get this resolved."
"It needs a feature for scheduling of automation scripts to run automatically."
"There could be more configurable workflows regarding test case creation approval."
"It has a very large footprint, and takes an inordinate amount of time to load the components and seems to need to do this quite frequently."
"I think if we're looking at the legacy owned product, I think it's kind of come and gone as far as its ability to do what you need to do in a DevOps world."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is much cheaper than Micro Focus LoadRunner. We need perpetual licenses. Support is included in the first sale. After that, you need to renew support every year."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"Compared to the market, the price is high."
"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
7%
Government
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Performing Arts
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise160
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.