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

"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"With each new version, the tool gets better and better features."
"Comprehensive Rational Performance Tester results allow testers to identify bottlenecks in the systems under test."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"I strongly recommend this solution to others."
"Customization and extensions made in Java is valuable because this can help you set elements to improve your results."
"Different modules (e.g. Requirements, Test Plan, Test Lab) provide traceability from requirements, test cases, and defects, along with project analysis in terms of progress via the dashboard reports."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"In ALM, the most valuable features are the overview, the primary requirements, test cases, defects, and traceability."
"My experience with the solution is that it has been fairly stable."
"It has dramatically reduced the number of defects that go into production."
"It is stable and reliable."
"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."
"My clients were able to implement an end-to-end process for software testing."
 

Cons

"It is complex for a novice."
"It was complex."
"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."
"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."
"As intuitive as a product can be, its use could still benefit from a decent set of manuals or guides."
"Installation and configuration processes, and support from IBM all need to be improved."
"Sometimes new versions have bugs."
"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"What happens is, we're having to use multiple products to come to one goal."
"The user interface is still dated. Writing test scripts in HPE ALM is generally avoided as the interface is too awkward to use."
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner."
"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."
"The reason why I wouldn't rate it higher than seven out of 10 is because you're still using really obsolete technology like ActiveX."
"HPE has failed desperately to offer a competitive enterprise for new customers in this market."
"Full product is very complex plus the licensing left much to be improved."
"It is expensive."
 

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."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."
"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."
"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."
"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."
"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."
"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
"Compared to the market, the price is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
903,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
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.
903,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.