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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.2
IBM Engineering Test Management improves efficiency, reduces defects, integrates well with IBM software, enhancing workflow and providing cost savings.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud users reported cost savings, improved load handling, and strategic insights, despite third-party network readiness issues during testing.
The ROI is not necessarily cost savings. Sometimes a customer wants to use OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, or it's the only tool that will solve the problem depending on the application.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.1
IBM Engineering Test Management's customer support is praised for responsiveness and effectiveness, with improvements in response times and satisfactory experiences.
Sentiment score
6.7
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is praised for responsive, knowledgeable support, although complex issue resolutions may require escalation and vary by personnel.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
IBM Engineering Test Management scales smoothly for large organizations with thousands of users and test cases, including automated ones.
Sentiment score
7.6
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers scalable capabilities, efficiently handling user loads and supporting cloud-based operations with flexible user virtualization.
It is very scalable, and on the cloud, it's even more scalable, potentially unlimited.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Engineering Test Management is reliable and stable, with good performance but occasionally impacted by server configuration and database space issues.
Sentiment score
7.6
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is highly stable, with minor issues resolved quickly, and is rated more stable than competitors.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Engineering Test Management requires a user-friendly interface, enhanced usability, data handling, hierarchical structuring, and seamless integration with automated pipelines.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud requires improvements in reporting, flexibility, support, monitoring, integration, protocol support, and comprehensive analytics.
 

Setup Cost

<p>IBM Engineering Test Management provides robust features and customization with flexible pricing, ideal for large enterprises needing comprehensive test management.</p>
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers flexible, pay-as-you-go pricing with high costs justified by extensive protocol support and enterprise flexibility.
It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter, which is free.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Engineering Test Management is praised for fast, reliable customizable workflows, and robust integrations, particularly in testing and tracking functionality.
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers scalable, user-friendly, cost-effective performance testing with versatile protocol support and real-time insights.
Its LoadRunner functionality allows us to record a solution's networking protocol and replay them.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (8th)
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 8.6%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then put all the test cases, and put all the build code for the shared location. And then rational that shared location means that RQM has access to the shared location. So, when we execute, if a test case is automated, we can run it from RQM. We need to have the environment ready for it to execute. Once we have that, then we can select the task case. So, by clicking on one button, the other environment is automatically plugged in. Then test results will be automatically transferred back to our RQM. So, in RQM, we can view it, and it is integrated. So we can run the test and the automation from RQM, and the test results will come back. Azure DevOps first test case is there, but then we tried to use Selenium to do half automation. Still, we realized that it wouldn't have the integration. We could do something in the pipeline, but it fires the Selenium test automation code. But then the test results won't be brought back or added to AzureDesk DevOps. That's something that I do hope that there can be another other system that can have this kind of integration. RQM can be improved because it's not related to our server and could be faster. We need to find out how much database storage is needed and keep increasing it. We heard that the latest version of RQM can clean up some old ones and give the same test result. But that one feature we are yet to use. It's a setting that we can set up, and then it goes automatically or gives me the choice to do it manually.
AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement
The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational Quality Manager?
The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational Quality Manager?
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then pu...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational Quality Manager?
We create test cases, and then we need to plan a new task plan feature from the existing task case file and execute the test results, which will be saved in RQM. So that is how we are using the too...
Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
The pricing is high compared to other licensing tools like NeoLoad. It's not excessively expensive but higher than NeoLoad. However, in my experience, clients often weigh NeoLoad and LoadRunner equ...
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.