IBM Rational Performance Tester vs Tricentis qTest comparison

IBM and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. IBM is ranked #23, while Tricentis is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.7. IBM holds a 2.3% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 8.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Performance Te...

Read 17 IBM Rational Performance Tester reviews

754 Views
279 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tricentis qTest

Read 19 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,868 Views
1,382 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Performance Te...

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis qTest are both prominent software testing solutions. IBM Rational Performance Tester seems to have the upper hand in performance testing capabilities, while Tricentis qTest is preferred for its test management features.

Features: IBM Rational Performance Tester offers robust performance testing, extensive automation tools, and comprehensive scalability. Tricentis qTest is known for its strong test management, real-time analytics, and seamless integrations with other tools.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Performance Tester could enhance user-friendliness, reduce the complexity of its setup process, and offer better documentation. Tricentis qTest needs improved reporting capabilities, streamlined usability, and enhanced customization options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Rational Performance Tester requires detailed configuration, which can be time-consuming. It receives favorable feedback for its customer support. Tricentis qTest is appreciated for its relatively straightforward deployment and responsive support services.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Performance Tester's setup costs are high but considered worthwhile for large-scale projects. Tricentis qTest offers competitive pricing and users report good return on investment for its management capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

23rd

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 2.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis qTest is 8.7%, down from 15.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tricentis qTest	8.7%
IBM Rational Performance Tester	2.3%
Other	89.0%

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

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.

Read full review

reviewer2356440

Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

User stories and test artifacts migrate seamlessly to innovative management tools

Customers are moving towards Tricentis due to their association with SAP. There is interest in understanding if there are connectors for converting UFT scripts to Tosca, as many customers are looking to make this transition. We have developed capabilities for automated migration from ALM to Tricentis qTest without any loss of data. However, for UFT to Tosca migration, scripts need to be rewritten as there are no automatic converters available. From a project perspective, there have not been many challenges with Tricentis products. The main improvement area would be developing a connector to move UFT scripts to Tosca, which would enable quicker and easier movement for customers. This would aid faster adoption of Tosca and ease the financial pressure on clients who currently need to invest in rewriting scripts.

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."

"UI and UX are pretty easy to understand without much of a problem."

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."

"The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

"The self-healing aspects and maintenance of scripts are much faster and quicker, and we are able to find better avenues and better productivity in terms of maintenance, which we can pass on to the customer."

"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."

"The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well."

"Works well for test management and is a good testing repository."

"Tricentis qTest brought benefits by providing all test cases in one central repository with easy access."

More Tricentis qTest 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."

"qTest offers a baseline feature where you can only base sort-order for a specific story or requirement on two fields. However, our company has so many criteria and has so many verticals that this baseline feature is not sufficient. We would want another field to be available in the sort order."

"As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many users."

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."

"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"One of the things I noticed was the reporting part wasn't very good."

"I really can't stand the Defects module. It's not easy to use. ALM's... Defects Module is really robust. You can actually walk through each defect by just clicking an arrow... But with the qTest Defects module you can't do that. You have to run a query. You're pretty much just querying a database. It's not really a module, or at least a robust module. Everything is very manual."

More Tricentis qTest 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."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Real Estate/Law Firm

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Healthcare Company

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	14

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

The solution is expensive. For the features that are available, depending on the volumes of licenses we get, we are able to get better discounts as strategic partners of Tosca. We can pass some ben...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

One of the things I noticed was the reporting part wasn't very good. It was hard to customize the dashboards in Tricentis qTest, and there were limitations in the dashboard. There may be missing fe...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Tricentis qTest?

The main use cases for Tricentis qTest are for test management, to keep test cases and execute those. Overall, centralized test management with Tricentis qTest was beneficial for the team's product...

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 26% of the time

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

Compared 22% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 13% of the time

Visual Studio Test Professional vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 10% of the time

TestRail vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 24% of the time

OpenText Application Quality Management vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 16% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 13% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 6% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 6% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester

January 2026

Download IBM Rational Performance Tester product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

January 2026

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester

qTest

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

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

December 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest report.

See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

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.