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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

 

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
15th
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
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Functional Testing Tools (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 2.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 3.0%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Oracle Application Testing Suite3.0%
IBM Engineering Test Management2.7%
Other94.3%
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

"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."
"The product is very fast, very reliable as a solution, and well structured so you can customize it within your business workflows."
"Project realization has been carried out much faster."
"Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product."
"The technical support from IBM is very good."
"It's very reliable as a solution."
"It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need, and it has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability."
"OATS provides the functionality to institute a corporate-wide standardized method and approach for all types of application testing."
"Now I feel its the best tool to automate any of the Oracle Products, which include Oracle EBS Applications, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel, Adobe Flex, ADF applications, etc.."
"Implementation of Oracle Application Testing Suite package has increased the overall efficiency."
"For a few years, OATS was the only tool that allowed us to load test our Computer Telephone Integration (CTI) with Siebel."
"Overall, Oracle Application Testing Suite is very easy to use and you can create a good framework for developing and testing."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"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."
"Helps us to reduce the workload to check the system."
 

Cons

"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."
"In a test plan, all of the test cases are flat and there's no hierarchy in it."
"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."
"Overall, the solution is not user-friendly, and you need a very technical person on it in order to run it properly."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"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)."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"We have stability issues with the server logging off when a script runs from OTM."
"I think that licensing policies could be more intuitive; when we installed this application for the first time, we couldn't understand why there were only two users."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
 

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."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"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."
"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.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.