IBM Rational Performance Tester vs OpenText Application Quality Management comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. IBM is ranked #25, while OpenText is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1. IBM holds a 1.5% mindshare in TMT, compared to OpenText’s 12.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Performance Te...

Read 17 IBM Rational Performance Tester reviews

588 Views
106 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Application Qualit...

Read 208 OpenText Application Quality Management reviews

5,145 Views
1,389 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Performance Te...

OpenText Application Qualit...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

IBM Rational Performance Tester and OpenText Application Quality Management are direct competitors in the software testing market. IBM is often preferred due to its appealing pricing and robust customer support, while OpenText is favored for its advanced feature set.

Features: IBM Rational Performance Tester is known for its powerful test scripts, automated load testing capabilities, and insightful analytical reports. It supports test cases data pools and logging features, and has extensive protocol support, including HTTP and SAP. OpenText Application Quality Management excels in comprehensive test management, requirements management, and defect tracking, with standout integration capabilities with various automation tools.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Performance Tester could enhance its user interface to be more intuitive, improve the flexibility of its resource monitoring options, and offer better integration with third-party tools. OpenText Application Quality Management may benefit from simplifying its setup process, reducing its dependency on initial high investment, and expanding its support for cloud-based deployment strategies.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText offers flexible deployment options including SaaS, on-premise, and hybrid models, supported by a robust customer service team. IBM provides a more straightforward deployment process that is generally easier to handle, with reliable support services that assist users effectively.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Performance Tester is appreciated for its competitive pricing, conducive to a favorable ROI with lower initial costs and efficient testing outcomes. OpenText Application Quality Management, although associated with higher initial costs, justifies these expenses with a comprehensive feature set and extensive management tools that promise significant long-term ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,295 peers since 2012

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

25th

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Application Qualit...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Application Quality Management is 12.5%, up from 12.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

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.

Read full review

Hosney Osman

Senior Operation Engineer 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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."

"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."

"The independent view of elevated access is good."

"It's user friendly, scalable, and very stable and strong. It's cooperative, meaning that I can assess the test to check it and follow the flow of defects, and the developers and the business can use this tool to follow the test process."

"The solution is very user-friendly."

"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."

"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."

"From my service provider perspective, the best features of the product are real-time tracking and reporting capabilities, which help with project management by enabling real-time tracking and reporting."

"The integration with UFT is nice."

"It has a good response time."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."

"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."

"The solution's reporting could be improved."

"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."

"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."

"It is not a scalable solution."

"The QA needs improvement."

More OpenText Application Quality Management cons

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."

"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."

"Only major companies that can afford it use OpenText ALM."

"The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."

"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 solution is priceed high."

"Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license."

"It has several limitations in adapting its agility easily."

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

More OpenText Application Quality Management pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

26%

Government

15%

Computer Software Company

15%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center?

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 53% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 29% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 18% of the time

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Competitors

OpenText Software Delivery Management vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 18% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 16% of the time

Tricentis qTest vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Jira vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 12% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Application Quality Management

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Application Quality Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester

August 2025

Download IBM Rational Performance Tester product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Application Quality Management

August 2025

OpenText Application Quality Management report

Download OpenText Application Quality Management product report

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM

Overview

IBM Rational Performance Tester is a performance testing solution that validates the scalability of web and server applications. Rational Performance Tester identifies the presence and cause of system performance bottlenecks and reduces load testing complexity.

IBM

OpenText Application Quality Management offers extensive capabilities in test management, automation tool integration, and defect traceability, providing an efficient and user-friendly experience for tracking and managing testing workflows.

The platform supports test management by integrating with automation tools and managing the traceability of defects and requirements. It facilitates users with linking test cases to defects, uploading from Excel, and generating customizable reports, which enhances efficiency. Business Process Testing and requirement capturing for test cases further extend its capabilities. Users report concerns about its integration with other tools, particularly in DevOps and agile frameworks, as well as challenges with its complex interface and high cost. Improved integration, better browser compatibility, upgraded dashboards, and enhanced support for agile methodologies are recommended by many users.

What are the most important features of OpenText Application Quality Management?

Integration with Automation Tools: Facilitates seamless testing through integration.
Test Management: Centralized management of test scenarios and cycles.
Defect Traceability: Links defects with test cases for comprehensive tracking.
Excel Uploads: Allows users to import data directly from spreadsheets.
Customizable Reports: Offers tailored reporting capabilities to suit user needs.
Business Process Testing: Supports streamlined testing of business processes.
Requirement Capturing: Efficiently captures and maps test case requirements.

What benefits or ROI can users expect?

Efficiency: Increases speed and accuracy in managing test processes.
Comprehensive Tracking: Provides a thorough view of test and defect linkages.
User-Friendly Interface: Enhances ease of use and reduces complexity.
Improved Testing Accuracy: Facilitates better detection and management of defects.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances functionality with investment value.

In industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology, organizations apply OpenText Application Quality Management for test management, planning, and automation. It is an essential tool for managing test scenarios, recording results, and supporting both manual and automated testing processes. This tool aids in regression testing, ensuring requirement traceability and acting as a repository for executing test cycles, thereby supporting robust quality assurance practices.

OpenText

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon

Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

July 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. OpenText Application Quality Management report.

See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Management Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.