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

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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 Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (14th), Test Automation Tools (31st)
OpenText Core Performance E...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 1.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) is 9.5%, up from 8.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud)9.5%
IBM Rational Test Workbench1.9%
Other88.6%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Specialist, ITE at a government with 10,001+ employees
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.
Jyoti Ranjan Behera - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Test Analyst at Sensata Technologies
User-friendly features facilitate monitoring while support could be more responsive
I am satisfied with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as a product, but the ticket resolution time is concerning. The technical personnel are not able to fix issues quickly, which becomes problematic during critical situations. Compared to previous support, I notice that while experts previously resolved issues immediately, current experts take more time to resolve issues, which is the main challenge we are facing. They are now lacking regional support, which takes more time than it used to. My suggestions for improvements to OpenText LoadRunner Cloud would be to have specific experts available who can resolve issues more quickly, as delays can impact project timelines significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"It's fast, easy to use, has a user-friendly UI, and you can split users."
"The product supports a wide variety of technology compared to any other tool."
"The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud can scale in a cloud-based environment to support up to ten thousand concurrent users without capacity loss, which is not possible with on-premise solutions on personal machines."
"This solution is SaaS based so we can utilize cloud technology, which is less time consuming and saves a lot of of money."
"I rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"The support team provides delayed responses."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."
"We encounter hurdles while running the professional version for on-premise setup."
"In terms of new features, they can natively integrate with Chaos engineering tools such as Chaos Monkey and AWS FIS. With LoadRunner, we can generate load, and if Chaos tools are also supported natively, it will help to get everything together."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Some improvements can be made to the solution's user interface"
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."
"It is expensive compared to other tools."
"The solution’s price is considerably high."
"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is neither costly nor cheap. It is not too high and not too low. I know the price of other tools, and LoadRunner Cloud's price is in the medium range."
"It's a very expensive solution"
"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Non Profit
9%
University
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
OpenText LoadRunner Cloud pricing is flexible, offering a more affordable solution compared to the more expensive on-premise LoadRunner. The hourly usage model allows cost-saving when used rightly.
 

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.