No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 (15th)
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (2nd)
 

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 3.5%, up 1.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 14.4% mindshare, up 13.9% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester3.5%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail5.9%
Other81.2%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)14.4%
Tricentis NeoLoad11.6%
Apache JMeter9.8%
Other64.2%
Performance Testing 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.
SR
Assistant Director at Synapxe
Has enabled my team to identify bottlenecks effectively and deliver reliable performance analysis across projects
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 heard of any significant issues. I can gather specific improvement suggestions from my architect and provide that information later.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"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."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"Real time view and its inbuilt root cause analysis tools is something which I like the most."
"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"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."
"This tool is very scalable, and for large scale tests, i.e., 5000 virtual users and up, it performs very well."
"I'm really happy with what they’re giving me for what I do, but because I don't do performance monitoring or performance testing using LoadRunner, I'm not completely aware of everything else, but for what I do it's a great tool for me."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"LoadRunner is easier to use and has support for better protocols."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"LoadRunner has a variety of options and different protocols that will support all types of applications categories like web application, monitor and any internal applications or desktop applications."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
 

Cons

"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"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."
"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."
"It was complex."
"Reporting needs improvement to provide more customization options in the performance test analyst to build custom reports."
"It is complex for a novice."
"Support for more protocols is required."
"We had open many PMRs for problems found in the products, and I'm not sure if all of them have been fixed."
"Customer Service: I'd say that customer service is not good. Technical Support: Technical support is also not good."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"More guidance on the use of the Tru Client protocol which is used for Web interfaces."
"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."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"The flexibility could be improved. For example, there are some use cases where I prefer to use NeoLoad rather than LoadRunner because of the flexibility that it provides."
"The demo that I've seen today, it sounds pretty cool but it still has some limitations I guess."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
 

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."
"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."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."
"It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"I would still consider LoadRunner as an expensive tool and you get a LoadRunner and the Performance Center."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
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 Enterprise67
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I work only with the performance testing tools and not with OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) for mobile and web applications. With performance testing, I am t...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, UiPath, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: May 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.