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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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 Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (13th)
Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Functional Testing Tools (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 3.6%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 2.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Engineering Test Management3.6%
Oracle Application Testing Suite2.5%
Other93.9%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
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.
Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product."
"The most valuable feature is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases."
"RQM is something that we use everyday, so it has to be up and running, otherwise we would lose everything."
"In the latest version, Global Configuration is the most promising feature as it allows the user to maintain different versions of the same artifact in different streams."
"The technical support from IBM is very good."
"The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"Testing can be linked with requirements, which makes traceability very easy."
"Project realization has been carried out much faster."
"The best feature of this and Load Test is simplicity."
"This is the best tool I have used till today as it allows us to handle automation in variety of ways."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature, the recording feature is the prime feature that open script has, and I also like the connectivity with Oracle Forms as it is very compatible."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"OATS provides the functionality to institute a corporate-wide standardized method and approach for all types of application testing."
"My advice to others is if they are using any Oracle Cloud Fusion-based or on-premise-based application, this is a good solution to use."
 

Cons

"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"For the CLM tools, IBM provides a good automatic setup, but on the WebSphere side, there is a lot of complex configuration to attend the services."
"RQM could be improved by adding a feature that allows test requirements to be selected when creating a task plan."
"Support of parameter needs to be easier."
"The user interface can be improved; it is the same interface that I have been seeing for the past so many years, whereas the other CLM modules changed significantly."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"There are certain bugs which were present but was cleared in subsequent releases of application, but still there is room for improvement in the Functionality testing tool when automating form-based applications."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"There is one piece of functionality that is currently not offered and would be very good to have: Support for Digital Certificates authentication and Single Sign-On (SSO)."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licenses of these tools (the whole CLM package) is very costly as compared to other vendors' tools."
"Each license includes 12 months of customer support. A free 90-day trial of the software is also available."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Healthcare Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
11%
Healthcare Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
OATS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.