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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.2
IBM Engineering Test Management improves efficiency, reduces defects, integrates well with IBM software, enhancing workflow and providing cost savings.
Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise provides financial benefits by minimizing risks and enhancing efficiency through comprehensive protocol testing.
I have seen an ROI from this tool, as it provides enormous value.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.1
IBM Engineering Test Management's customer support is praised for responsiveness and effectiveness, with improvements in response times and satisfactory experiences.
Sentiment score
6.2
Users have mixed experiences with LoadRunner Enterprise support, praising higher-level service but noting slower responses post-HP transition.
BlazeMeter, compared to LoadRunner, is still scalable and expandable easily.
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
The technical support experience is a bit limited due to this indirect relationship.
Performance Test Lead at Xilligence Ltd
The customer service and technical support for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is reasonable, not impressive, but provides adequate assistance.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
IBM Engineering Test Management scales smoothly for large organizations with thousands of users and test cases, including automated ones.
Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise scales well for extensive workloads, but high licensing costs and infrastructure constraints may limit some users.
I rate the scalability of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) as ten when using a scale from one to ten, with one being low.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
It is simple to scale.
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Engineering Test Management is reliable and stable, with good performance but occasionally impacted by server configuration and database space issues.
Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is generally stable, though newer versions show variability, with improvements yet occasional stability challenges.
However, it remains quite stable.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
From a stability point of view for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I would rate it as seven based on the version that we are using.
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Engineering Test Management requires a user-friendly interface, enhanced usability, data handling, hierarchical structuring, and seamless integration with automated pipelines.
OpenText users seek improvements in third-party integration, UI, cloud support, automation, TruClient, technical support, documentation, and cost.
It could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
If OpenText could think about bringing AI features into the tool, it could save maximum time in scripting or make scripting effortless, particularly in correlation, which is where the complexity involved in script development exists.
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Setup Cost

<p>IBM Engineering Test Management provides robust features and customization with flexible pricing, ideal for large enterprises needing comprehensive test management.</p>
Users find LoadRunner Enterprise costly but valuable, especially globally, appreciating its flexible licensing amid cheaper alternatives.
When discussing price, OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is very expensive, which I would represent by a rating of ten.
Performance Test Lead at Xilligence Ltd
It is neither cheap nor expensive.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
 

Valuable Features

IBM Engineering Test Management is praised for fast, reliable customizable workflows, and robust integrations, particularly in testing and tracking functionality.
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering offers centralized testing, scalability, and diverse tools, enhancing collaboration and adaptability for varied testing needs.
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) helps us to identify the hotspots from the applications during peak times through the LRE simulation.
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
The scalable testing environment is very beneficial for my performance testing processes.
Performance Test Lead at Xilligence Ltd
The best features of this solution are easy scripting and broad platform support.
Founder & Chief Executive Officer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (14th)
OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
86
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 3.1%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 6.5%, up from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise)6.5%
IBM Engineering Test Management3.1%
Other90.4%
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then put all the test cases, and put all the build code for the shared location. And then rational that shared location means that RQM has access to the shared location. So, when we execute, if a test case is automated, we can run it from RQM. We need to have the environment ready for it to execute. Once we have that, then we can select the task case. So, by clicking on one button, the other environment is automatically plugged in. Then test results will be automatically transferred back to our RQM. So, in RQM, we can view it, and it is integrated. So we can run the test and the automation from RQM, and the test results will come back. Azure DevOps first test case is there, but then we tried to use Selenium to do half automation. Still, we realized that it wouldn't have the integration. We could do something in the pipeline, but it fires the Selenium test automation code. But then the test results won't be brought back or added to AzureDesk DevOps. That's something that I do hope that there can be another other system that can have this kind of integration. RQM can be improved because it's not related to our server and could be faster. We need to find out how much database storage is needed and keep increasing it. We heard that the latest version of RQM can clean up some old ones and give the same test result. But that one feature we are yet to use. It's a setting that we can set up, and then it goes automatically or gives me the choice to do it manually.
VK
A VP at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Performance testing has supported web app peak analysis but needs better setup and smarter scripting
Regarding points for improvement for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), I see that features are not being fully developed yet. If OpenText could think about bringing AI features into the tool, it could save maximum time in scripting or make scripting effortless, particularly in correlation, which is where the complexity involved in script development exists. If any AI features could replace or eliminate more manual work on the correlation part, that is where we could see a game-changing improvement for the tool. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) can be positioned very well in the market. However, I see that the basic correlations are only being handled by the autocorrelation engine in the LoadRunner tool, and I would expect a few improvements to handle even complex correlation problems so that the tool can be appropriately positioned compared to their peers.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
907,816 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise75
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
When discussing price, OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is very expensive, which I would represent by a rating of ten. The product carries maximum expense points.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Regarding negative sides or areas for improvement, I do not see any disadvantages so far. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) might have some drawbacks, but I did no...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
I always consider the purposes and use cases from an enterprise version perspective as a user of the product.
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Engineering Test Management vs. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
907,816 professionals have used our research since 2012.