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 #19, while OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.6. IBM holds a 2.1% 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

883 Views
283 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Professional Perfo...

Read 82 OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) reviews

3,922 Views
3,059 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: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

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

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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

19th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (15th), Test Automation Tools (27th)

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 February 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 2.1%, 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	2.1%
Other	85.8%

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 solution can handle a huge amount of workloads, it's quite scalable."

"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."

"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."

"I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional's stability at eight out of ten."

"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."

"LoadRunner is a very sophisticated tool, and I can use many languages. For example, I can use Java. I can use C++. I can test the Internet of Things, FTP, mail, and Active Directory. It is very useful."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."

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."

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

"The pricing could be lower."

"We are going to continue to use the product in the future, I recommend this product. However, those who are looking for only REST-based on the API, I would recommend some other tool because of the cost. There are others available on the market."

"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."

"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"

"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."

"The solution's pricing is expensive."

"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."

"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 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."

"I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing."

"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."

"The pricing model, especially when involving partners, could use some improvement."

"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."

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

881,733 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%

Government

Computer Software Company

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 10% of the time

Perfecto vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 10% of the time

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 9% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 8% of the time

HCL OneTest vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Rational Test Workbench Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 19% of the time

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

Compared 9% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)

Compared 5% of the time

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

Compared 5% 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

February 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)

February 2026

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: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 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.