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 (21st)
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 2.5%, up 1.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 12.7% mindshare, down 12.9% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester2.5%
OpenText Application Quality Management8.2%
Tricentis qTest7.8%
Other81.5%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)12.7%
Apache JMeter11.7%
Tricentis NeoLoad10.7%
Other64.9%
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

"Rational Performance Tester was perfectly suited to provide the means to monitor the availability and performance of our web services."
"Less coding is needed, it is easy to understand, and it is easy to integrate with existing systems so I can test more than one performance test type, including load testing, stress testing, and scalability testing."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"Helped in improving response times in a few of our transactions."
"Virtual Users."
"The setup was straightforward, it depends on the company's regulations and infrastructure policies."
"With each new version, the tool gets better and better features."
"The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period."
"It is a good and stable tool."
"Because we're a telecommunications company with millions of subscribers, we run very high volume tests for 24-48 hours, LoadRunner has been very, very stable during these tests and has gotten us results."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"Paramterization and correlation are important features."
"The support and the stability of those protocols are amazing."
 

Cons

"Since it is Java-based, it is expected to be a resource eater on Windows."
"The tool has lots of limitations."
"Support for more protocols is required."
"The installation and tool setup can take some time, since this involves several components."
"Installation and configuration processes, and support from IBM all need to be improved."
"I’d like to see a tighter integration with Rational Quality Manager and the Jazz platform."
"User friendliness can be better, as this is one area where it lacks."
"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."
"LoadRunner is a well-rounded, polished tool – but it does need more improvement when it comes to it application of load, more flexibility mid-test would be nice."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The initial start-up of Micro Focus LoadRunner could be improved. When we add 20 or 30 scripts, the refresh is completed one by one. I would like to be able to select all the script at one time, so it can be completed in a single click, reducing the time required."
"The extended features are available but the high pricing is an issue."
"I also use the TrueClient feature for browser-based testing. I found the TrueClient feature to be a bit difficult to use and not very user-friendly for automating scripts."
"LoadRunner experiences high resource utilization. Even though we have machines with higher configurations, I've observed this behavior. Heavy traffic recording results in the tool hanging. So heavy traffic recording makes the tool slow."
"If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help."
 

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 is reasonable. We pay the cost, but we have everything. We have a big set of licenses for SAP and other applications. We have all kinds of licenses."
"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."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"Pricing depends on our choices because it depends on what type of protocol we are getting, what type of licensing we are getting, and what kind of relationships we have with HP and Micro Focus."
"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 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
19%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
6%
Healthcare 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: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.