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

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 (15th)
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (2nd), Load Testing Tools (2nd)
 

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 3.5%, up 1.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional), on the other hand, focuses on Performance Testing Tools, holds 14.4% mindshare, up 13.9% since last year.
Test Management Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Rational Performance Tester3.5%
OpenText Application Quality Management9.4%
TestRail5.9%
Other81.2%
Test Management Tools
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)14.4%
Tricentis NeoLoad11.6%
Apache JMeter9.8%
Other64.2%
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.
SR
Assistant Director at Synapxe
Has enabled my team to identify bottlenecks effectively and deliver reliable performance analysis across projects
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 heard of any significant issues. I can gather specific improvement suggestions from my architect and provide that information later.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's one of the most cost-effective products on the market."
"The setup was straightforward, it depends on the company's regulations and infrastructure policies."
"ROI is big because we do not need vendors to assist some with performance testing."
"Comprehensive Rational Performance Tester results allow testers to identify bottlenecks in the systems under test."
"It's definitely helped in scaling the performance of our application."
"I strongly recommend this solution to others."
"Customization and extensions made in Java is valuable because this can help you set elements to improve your results."
"It has improved our visibility of reporting and simplifying performance testing for larger projects/programs."
"Available protocols."
"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"In many scenarios, you have to be able to run or put load on your application, and that's what that product does, and it does it pretty well."
"The implementation was very straightforward and not an issue."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them, and it provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"The most valuable feature of LoadRunner is its ability to simulate multiple uses at the same time."
"Customer support is available online and it's good enough for solving the general problems that pop up."
 

Cons

"Sometimes new versions have bugs."
"The tool has lots of limitations."
"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."
"User friendliness can be better, as this is one area where it lacks."
"Installation and configuration processes, and support from IBM all need to be improved."
"For a rational performance testing solution, the initial setup is very complex. The setup was difficult and the documentation was not very up to date."
"Since it is Java-based, it is expected to be a resource eater on Windows."
"Support for more protocols is required."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"The extended features are available but the high pricing is an issue."
"Scripting should be simpler, it becomes very complex many times."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"Lacks specific level monitoring."
"The pricing could be lower."
"The infrastructure support can be improved because there are a lot of limitations with the hardware that you can use."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
 

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 licensing of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. If it can be easier and the concurrent run can be included with the current total number of users, it would be helpful."
"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."
"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."
"The pricing model and the software licensing model could be better."
"The price is a bit on the high side, but it is still affordable."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"LoadRunner is more expensive than some competing products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 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
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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 Enterprise67
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I work only with the performance testing tools and not with OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) for mobile and web applications. With performance testing, I am t...
 

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, UiPath, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: May 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.