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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 13, 2025

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
7.4
Users find OpenText Enterprise Performance invaluable for 200% ROI through enhanced reliability, bottleneck prevention, and significant cost savings.
 

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
6.3
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise's customer service is responsive and supportive, with mixed technical support experiences and noted improvements.
 

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
7.6
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise excels in scalability for performance testing, though licensing costs challenge larger user loads.
 

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 praised for its stability and reliability, despite occasional infrastructure-related challenges and necessary maintenance.
 

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 LoadRunner Enterprise needs improvements in scheduling, integration, interface, cloud support, reporting, browser compatibility, and technical support.
 

Setup Cost

<p>IBM Engineering Test Management provides robust features and customization with flexible pricing, ideal for large enterprises needing comprehensive test management.</p>
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is often seen as pricey, with complexity in licensing and cost-saving options for users.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Engineering Test Management is praised for fast, reliable customizable workflows, and robust integrations, particularly in testing and tracking functionality.
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise excels in performance testing with user-friendly interface, robust scalability, and integration, offering high return on investment.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (8th)
OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Load Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Engineering Test Management is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.2%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Load Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
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.
VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
19%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational Quality Manager?
The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing.
What needs improvement with IBM Rational Quality Manager?
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 pu...
What is your primary use case for IBM Rational Quality Manager?
We create test cases, and then we need to plan a new task plan feature from the existing task case file and execute the test results, which will be saved in RQM. So that is how we are using the too...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
 

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: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.