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

"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"Comprehensive Rational Performance Tester results allow testers to identify bottlenecks in the systems under test."
"Rational Performance Tester was perfectly suited to provide the means to monitor the availability and performance of our web services."
"Real time view and its inbuilt root cause analysis tools is something which I like the most."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"It's definitely helped in scaling the performance of our application."
"Customization and extensions made in Java is valuable because this can help you set elements to improve your results."
"The tool has increased the collaboration between different teams."
"In the case of the software development company, the use of HPE QC helped us to become compliant with GAMP and ISO requirements."
"It has sped up our regression testing cycle almost three times what it is if we do it manually."
"The stability is very good."
"The most valuable thing is the flexibility of the customized options, which makes it more powerful than any other tool because we can customize based on the project and on how we want to control the testing."
"Quality Center has improved my organization from a traceability and test coverage point of view."
"The Defect Module helps the project team to track the defects in a structured and manageable way until defects closure."
"For me and for our organization, it's a really good product; I'm really happy with it and it meets my needs completely."
 

Cons

"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"For a rational performance testing solution, the initial setup is very complex. The setup was difficult and the documentation was not very up to date."
"Reporting needs improvement to provide more customization options in the performance test analyst to build custom reports."
"User friendliness can be better, as this is one area where it lacks."
"Now, the price slightly expensive especially if you are in small-medium company, but if you are in a medium-high company, and need the powerful tools with IBM great name, just use it."
"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."
"Sometimes new versions have bugs."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester."
"The UI is terrible in the sense that we actually use automation scripts to avoid being in the UI, which is just fascinating, and then the data model."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application."
"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."
"I've faced a couple of bugs in the product whereby we were not able to open attachments on a particular ticket."
"We would like to have support for agile development."
"Our biggest problem with ALM is the version upgrade and especially the migration."
"Technical support is not that great. We really need to push to get HPE support to provide a resolution for technical issues."
"Certain features are lousy. Those features can drag the whole server down. There are times that the complex SQL queries are not easy to do within this solution."
 

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."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"The pricing is expensive nowadays."
"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
"The solution is priceed high."
"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
"For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 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.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.