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

"Once you are used to this tool, it is user friendly and provides very good analysis for web applications."
"Customization and extensions made in Java is valuable because this can help you set elements to improve your results."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"The setup was straightforward, it depends on the company's regulations and infrastructure policies."
"Comprehensive Rational Performance Tester results allow testers to identify bottlenecks in the systems under test."
"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"We are happy, it is a good product, we have benefited from the tool and recommend it, and we have received very good feedback regarding its use."
"What's most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is that it's useful for these activities: test designing, test planning, and test execution."
"Traceability of bugs to script execution (Test Lab) to Script (Test Plan) to Requirements, Easy to use."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"The report feature has helped me to generate a quality index report which is a critical report for management decisions."
 

Cons

"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."
"Reporting needs improvement to provide more customization options in the performance test analyst to build custom reports."
"The HP tool is overall a little better but much more expensive."
"It is complex for a novice."
"We had open many PMRs for problems found in the products, and I'm not sure if all of them have been fixed."
"Since it is Java-based, it is expected to be a resource eater on Windows."
"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"One issue I have faced was that while I was importing test cases from Excel to Quality Center, it was not asking to check out the test cases but instead it would overwrite the default test cases and create a new version for it."
"We found some difficulty in working with it, as we're a large organization."
"We are having a lot of problems with this product and we're now looking at other options."
"It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"The main barriers of entry are cost and implementation, especially if an enterprise implementation is the best solution"
"ALM has not directly assisted scalability. I wouldn't say ALM assists with scalability at all."
"We need to move test cases manually from Test Case module to Test Execution module. This consumes more manual interaction."
 

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. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."
"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."
"Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
903,257 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare 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 Business4
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.
903,257 professionals have used our research since 2012.