We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"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."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"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 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."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 25th in Test Management Tools while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 71 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "We can edit captured transactions and organize them by those for which we require performance metrics, but it lacks a set of manuals or guides that would take out some guess work". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish.
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.