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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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...
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (22nd)
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM Rational Performance Tester is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.4%, up 1.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 12.1% mindshare, down 12.8% since last year.
Test Management Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester2.4%
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
Tricentis qTest8.1%
Other81.3%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)12.1%
Apache JMeter12.1%
Tricentis NeoLoad10.1%
Other65.7%
Performance Testing 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.
SD
Assistant Consultant at Tata Consultancy
Experience a decade of seamless performance with robust support
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those points remain similar and applicable. For future updates, I would like to see the same features that people generally prefer. I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible; if we get a chance to work with that, then we can check how much it helps.

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 most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs."
"The reporting is very good in regard to scripting and debugging."
"One of the most valuable features of LoadRunner Professional is the wide range of protocols it supports, especially the web user v user types."
"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."
"The implementation was very straightforward and not an issue."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
 

Cons

"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."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
 

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 price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
"It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive."
"For licensing, we pay a lot for it. But the incentive is the support we get with it, that we pay once, and we are set."
"There is an annual license required to use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. There are not any additional costs other than the licensing fees to use it."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Educational Organization
5%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
 

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 Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I have mentioned many advantages about this product, but to discuss disadvantages or areas that could be improved, I would need to consult with my engineers who are working on it. So far I have not...
 

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Tricentis and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.