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

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 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 Rational Performance Te...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Application Qualit...
Ranking in Test Management Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (3rd), Quality Management Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 2.5%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 8.2%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
IBM Rational Performance Tester2.5%
Other89.3%
Test Management Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Service provider recognizes effective project tracking and reporting capabilities
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlenecks. As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern.

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."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"Real time view and its inbuilt root cause analysis tools is something which I like the most."
"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"Rational Performance Tester was perfectly suited to provide the means to monitor the availability and performance of our web services."
"Virtual Users."
"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"The integration with UFT is nice."
"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."
"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
"The Defect Module helps the project team to track the defects in a structured and manageable way until defects closure."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."
"What I love about it is that it can be used for the entire lifecycle (from requirements to release) and the dashboard is great for reporting."
 

Cons

"Since it is Java-based, it is expected to be a resource eater on Windows."
"Now, the price slightly expensive especially if you are in small-medium company, but if you are in a medium-high company, and need the powerful tools with IBM great name, just use it."
"We had open many PMRs for problems found in the products, and I'm not sure if all of them have been fixed."
"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."
"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."
"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"It was complex."
"The HP tool is overall a little better but much more expensive."
"It is definitely overpriced. Most of the cost is for support that you rarely need if you have an onsite admin."
"The extract format is not ideal, splitting expected results into three line items, making interpretation difficult."
"There are cases where the system does not meet our reporting requirements."
"It has a very large footprint, and takes an inordinate amount of time to load the components and seems to need to do this quite frequently."
"It's complicated to upgrade."
"The performance needs work, as over the past couple years, where I have worked with large companies, I noticed slower response times."
"As for the scalability of OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, there are limitations, particularly in agile methodologies, which is currently my main concern."
"We have had a bit of trouble at times and, in all fairness, sometimes we felt quite left alone."
 

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."
"It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution."
"I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
"The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"The licensing fee is a little expensive."
"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."
"Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so less people were able to use it for their projects."
"The pricing is expensive nowadays."
"We pay around $30,000 for thirty users, translating to approximately $6,000 to $10,000 per user, which is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise162
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
The on-premises setup tends to be on the expensive side. It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
Regarding integration with various development tools, I can provide examples, and I am using customizable dashboards in OpenText ALM _ Quality Center, which definitely help identify project bottlen...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?
People are using OpenText ALM _ Quality Center for recording user cases, testing and hand documentation, defect tracking, business purposes, and reporting.
 

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM, OpenText Quality Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.