Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) comparison

The compared IBM and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. IBM is ranked #24 in TMT , and holds a 1.5% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #4 in PTT , with an average rating of 8.6, and holds a 13.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
IBM Rational Performance Te...
Read 17 IBM Rational Performance Tester reviews
  • 574 Views
  • 121 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Tricentis and others in Test Management Tools.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: September 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Test Management Tools
September 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 869,095 peers since 2012

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...
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (24th)
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM Rational Performance Tester is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.5%, up 1.2% compared to last year.
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 13.6% mindshare, up 12.4% since last year.
Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester1.5%
Tricentis qTest14.4%
OpenText Application Quality Management12.5%
Other71.6%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.6%
Apache JMeter16.1%
Tricentis NeoLoad12.9%
Other57.4%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Read full review
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
Read full review

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."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"It is an advanced tool with multiple options available for the performance system."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pros
 

Cons

"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."
"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 reporting and GUI have room for improvement."
"Sometimes when we were migrating from one version to another, some of our scripts started failing."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) cons
 

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."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's pricing is reasonable."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"There is an annual license required to use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. There are not any additional costs other than the licensing fees to use it."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."
"This is not a cheap product."
"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."
"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."
More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
869,095 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
Read full review
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
15%
Retailer
4%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
6%
 

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 Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
The pricing should be reduced and made more competitive.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I have mentioned many advantages about this product, but to discuss disadvantages or areas that could be improved, I would need to consult with my engineers who are working on it. So far I have not...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester Logo
Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester
Compared 53% of the time
Tricentis NeoLoad vs IBM Rational Performance Tester Logo
Tricentis NeoLoad vs IBM Rational Performance Tester
Compared 22% of the time
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Competitors
Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Logo
Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
Compared 20% of the time
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Logo
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
Compared 13% of the time
Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Logo
Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
Compared 10% of the time
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Logo
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
Compared 6% of the time
Automai AppLoader vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Logo
Automai AppLoader vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
Compared 3% of the time
More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
IBM Rational Performance Tester
September 2025
IBM Rational Performance Tester reportDownload IBM Rational Performance Tester product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)
September 2025
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) reportDownload OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) product report
 

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

IBM Rational Performance Tester is a performance testing solution that validates the scalability of web and server applications. Rational Performance Tester identifies the presence and cause of system performance bottlenecks and reduces load testing complexity.
IBM

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering, known as LoadRunner Professional, stands out with its powerful scripting tool, flexible capabilities, and extensive analytics, supporting numerous concurrent users for impactful load testing.

This performance engineering tool offers integration across systems and strong community support, paired with user-friendly interfaces. It excels in features like multi-protocol support, auto-correlation, and detailed reporting. However, improvements are needed in user-friendliness and cost-effectiveness, as scripting remains complex and pricing is a hurdle. Enhancing mobile and SPA testing capabilities, modern protocol support, and compatibility with non-Windows platforms would greatly benefit users while expanding monitoring and technical support responsiveness.

What are the key features of OpenText LoadRunner Professional?
  • Powerful Scripting Tool: Facilitates complex load testing scenarios.
  • Flexible Engine: Supports various test configurations.
  • Multi-Protocol Support: Ensures broad compatibility.
  • Extensive Analytics: Provides real-time performance stats.
  • Concurrent User Simulation: Enables robust load testing.
  • Auto-Correlation: Simplifies script creation.
  • Comprehensive Reporting: Offers detailed insights.
What benefits should users expect from LoadRunner Professional?
  • Enhanced System Performance: Identifies and rectifies bottlenecks.
  • Cost Efficiency: Strategic use can reduce overall costs.
  • Industry Compatibility: Adapts to diverse environments.
  • Scalability: Supports applications with varied user loads.
  • Performance Benchmarking: Ensures optimal application performance.

LoadRunner Professional is employed for performance and load testing across sectors such as banking, hospitality, and telecommunications. Users simulate business transactions and test applications under different user loads, focusing on API testing, web applications, and benchmarking to achieve optimal performance in complex scenarios.

OpenText
 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Buyer's Guide
Test Management Tools
September 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Tricentis and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: September 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
869,095 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.