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

Original Software Qualify vs RadView WebLOAD 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

Original Software Qualify
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (31st)
RadView WebLOAD
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (12th), Load Testing Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Original Software Qualify and RadView WebLOAD aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Original Software Qualify is designed for Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites and holds a mindshare of 0.9%, up 0.1% compared to last year.
RadView WebLOAD, on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 3.5% mindshare, up 1.5% since last year.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Original Software Qualify0.9%
Jira11.2%
Microsoft Azure DevOps9.5%
Other78.4%
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
RadView WebLOAD3.5%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)13.6%
Tricentis NeoLoad10.7%
Other72.2%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Konstantinos Tasiopoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Group Integration Tools Manager at TITAN
Flexible, multifunctional, and stable testing software with good technical support
I've been using the latest version of Original Software Qualify AQM. Over 100 users in our company use Original Software Qualify AQM. We only have two people in charge of its deployment and maintenance. This software is extensively used in our company. Personally, I recommend Original Software Qualify AQM to other people looking into implementing it. You can do a lot of things with this software. The support is very good. The communication is very good, and they also listen to problems raised. They add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues. It's a very good tool and I recommend it. We've seen a return on investment from this software. I'm rating Original Software Qualify AQM a nine out of ten, because of several reasons: It's very good software, it's a supportive company, and we have very good results from it. This software also minimizes the effort of UATs, and it also allows us to deploy whatever we want.
it_user1265766 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at Medtronic, Inc.
IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process but the reporting is complicated
You pay for the number of users that you're going to be utilizing. In order to scale up, you would have to pay for additional users, but for our use case, we're able to scale fairly easily. We have a license for 500, but we're using half of that for our initial workflow. For maintenance, as far as I'm aware, there's only one person really working on the maintenance of it and we only really have one user consistently using the software. He's a QA person. We don't have any plans to increase our usage. Even though we've had it for a while, we have a major push to start utilizing it more. I imagine we'll probably be using it and utilizing it across our QA team in the next year. We're in the process of determining whether we're going to keep it or not due to the fact that it is so expensive. That's why I've been researching alternatives for the RadView.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Flexible software with multiple functions, e.g. scenario deployment, new entity creation, workflow creation, etc. Technical support for this software is very good."
"You can do a lot of things with this software; the support is very good, the communication is very good, they listen to problems raised, add new features and functionalities as a response to past problems or issues, and we have seen a return on investment from this software."
"Customer service is excellent; they're very responsive and willing to work extra hours, and in the first couple of hours that we were up and running, they taught us how to implement it and to figure out and negotiate AWS."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"Technical support has been excellent, responsive, and helpful in trying to work through issues and questions."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The tool itself is very viable for us."
"The analytics pack is probably one of the most powerful tools that I've seen."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
 

Cons

"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports. Its reporting function needs improvement."
"The reporting engine of Original Software Qualify AQM needs to change. It's very difficult to develop complex reports."
"We have had a lot of trouble with this solution, and it is actually adapted to our application."
"We did have an issue with some of the script working incorrectly in our higher environments."
"Well there’s one issue when I have five or six scripts-- you have to set up different percentages and the number of connections and users, no matter how I tweak it seems that when I have one of the load scripts in the mix set, a percentage of less than 8-10%, there’s a probability that it won’t run at all."
"They can improve in the reporting - the ability to generate custom reports."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"I would like to be able to edit a scenario instead of re-recording a scenario."
"When it finds a problem with response times, it doesn't specify exactly where the problem actually is."
"It would be great, in addition to the load tool, it would be nice, if Radview offered a JavaScript based functional test tool as well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This software is moderately priced."
"We purchased a license for two years."
"It costs $8,600 yearly and we have the Cloud, which is an additional $800. Our perpetual license is $800 and then the Cloud functionality with our 500 users is the $8,600."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Performing Arts
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Also Known As

Qualify
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CertainTeed, Marston's,  Edrington, Ageas,  iPERS.
GoDaddy, Praxair, DeVry University and the College Board.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, OpenText and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.