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 Jun 3, 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 July 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 3.5%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 9.6%, down from 12.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management9.6%
IBM Rational Performance Tester3.5%
Other86.9%
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.
GS
Partner at IS Nordic AS
Manages multiple releases seamlessly
We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"Once you are used to this tool, it is user friendly and provides very good analysis for web applications."
"I strongly recommend this solution to others."
"Rational Performance Tester was perfectly suited to provide the means to monitor the availability and performance of our web services."
"Less coding is needed, it is easy to understand, and it is easy to integrate with existing systems so I can test more than one performance test type, including load testing, stress testing, and scalability testing."
"Virtual Users."
"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"Real time view and its inbuilt root cause analysis tools is something which I like the most."
"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."
"ALM allows you to maintain complete end-to-end process."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"Before, we used Excel for complex testings; using this solution has been a huge step for us, and from reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"We were able to manage test cases effectively when we were using it. It worked well for us."
 

Cons

"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"Since it is Java-based, it is expected to be a resource eater on Windows."
"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."
"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"As intuitive as a product can be, its use could still benefit from a decent set of manuals or guides."
"Support for more protocols is required."
"The tool has lots of limitations."
"Sometimes new versions have bugs."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
"Costing is an area that needs improvement."
"GUI colours not that great"
"The performance of this product is really poor, and there is no dashboard (reports) for the groups or users on the home page."
"I've faced a couple of bugs in the product whereby we were not able to open attachments on a particular ticket."
"Pricing is not my area, but in general, what I've seen when reading articles is that it is costly."
 

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 pricing is expensive nowadays."
"The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective."
"The solution is priceed high."
"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
906,852 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
9%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise161
 

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: June 2026.
906,852 professionals have used our research since 2012.