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

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #18, while OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.4. IBM holds a 1.9% mindshare in PTT, compared to OpenText’s 12.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Test Workbench

Read 4 IBM Rational Test Workbench reviews

732 Views
256 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Read 82 OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) reviews

3,737 Views
2,915 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Test Workbench

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText LoadRunner Professional compete in software testing and performance engineering. OpenText LoadRunner Professional holds an edge due to its comprehensive feature set, capturing more preference despite Rational Test Workbench's favorable pricing and support.

Features: IBM Rational Test Workbench offers automated testing, integration capabilities within IBM frameworks, and effective collaboration with other IBM tools. OpenText LoadRunner Professional supports a wide range of protocols, detailed performance analysis, and provides robust load testing features.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Test Workbench could enhance ease of use, incorporate more third-party integrations, and improve reporting features. OpenText LoadRunner Professional may improve documentation, streamline cloud integrations, and refine user interface complexities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText LoadRunner Professional provides flexible deployment models, including cloud-based options, and extensive customer support for complex needs. IBM Rational Test Workbench integrates smoothly with IBM tools, offering reliable support, particularly for IBM-centric infrastructures.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Test Workbench features lower setup costs, delivering substantial ROI within IBM environments. OpenText LoadRunner Professional requires a higher initial investment, yet promises significant ROI through advanced performance optimization capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 Test Workbench

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

18th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (14th), Test Automation Tools (31st)

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (4th)

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 Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 12.1%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)	12.1%
IBM Rational Test Workbench	1.9%
Other	86.0%

Performance Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668

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.

Read full review

Saswata Dhar

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.

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

"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."

"It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance."

"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are the separate module for scripting, execution analysis, and integration with a lot of new things pipeline areas. They keep updating their releases. Recently, they have released different versions, such as the professional and enterprise. They're coming up with new features which are good."

"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."

"I would definitely recommend OpenText LoadRunner Professional to other users."

"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."

"It has features for recording. The best feature with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is that there is very little bottleneck or overhead issues. With LoadRunner, you can spawn 2000 contributions for one machine."

"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."

"Paramterization and correlation are important features."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional can improve the implementation of digital areas, such as digital testing, UI and native application, and native mobile applications."

"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."

"I would like to see better-licensing costs."

"The solution must be more user-friendly."

"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."

"Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement."

"The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight."

"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."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) cons

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."

"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."

"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."

"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."

"I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten."

"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."

"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."

"The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive."

"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."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user104961

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…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

31%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Non Profit

University

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	17
Midsize Enterprise	14
Large Enterprise	66

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?

The pricing should be reduced and made more competitive.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 12% of the time

Perfecto vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 11% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 10% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 9% of the time

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM Rational Test Workbench Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 10% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 6% of the time

ReadyAPI Performance vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

January 2026

Download IBM Rational Test Workbench product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

January 2026

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) report

Download OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) product report

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner

Overview

IBM Rational Test Workbench provides a comprehensive test automation solution for mobile applications, regression testing, integration technologies and performance and scalability testing. It helps you build intelligent and interconnected enterprise applications that can be deployed on traditional and cloud infrastructures. With Rational Test Workbench, you can significantly reduce test cycle times, moving integration testing earlier in the development lifecycle.

IBM

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering, known as LoadRunner Professional, stands out with its powerful scripting tool, flexible capabilities, and extensive analytics, supporting numerous concurrent users for impactful load testing.

This performance engineering tool offers integration across systems and strong community support, paired with user-friendly interfaces. It excels in features like multi-protocol support, auto-correlation, and detailed reporting. However, improvements are needed in user-friendliness and cost-effectiveness, as scripting remains complex and pricing is a hurdle. Enhancing mobile and SPA testing capabilities, modern protocol support, and compatibility with non-Windows platforms would greatly benefit users while expanding monitoring and technical support responsiveness.

What are the key features of OpenText LoadRunner Professional?

Powerful Scripting Tool: Facilitates complex load testing scenarios.
Flexible Engine: Supports various test configurations.
Multi-Protocol Support: Ensures broad compatibility.
Extensive Analytics: Provides real-time performance stats.
Concurrent User Simulation: Enables robust load testing.
Auto-Correlation: Simplifies script creation.
Comprehensive Reporting: Offers detailed insights.

What benefits should users expect from LoadRunner Professional?

Enhanced System Performance: Identifies and rectifies bottlenecks.
Cost Efficiency: Strategic use can reduce overall costs.
Industry Compatibility: Adapts to diverse environments.
Scalability: Supports applications with varied user loads.
Performance Benchmarking: Ensures optimal application performance.

LoadRunner Professional is employed for performance and load testing across sectors such as banking, hospitality, and telecommunications. Users simulate business transactions and test applications under different user loads, focusing on API testing, web applications, and benchmarking to achieve optimal performance in complex scenarios.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

December 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) report.

See our list of best Performance Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Performance Testing 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.