IBM Rational Performance Tester vs PractiTest comparison

IBM and PractiTest are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. IBM is ranked #24, while PractiTest is ranked #18. IBM holds a 1.4% mindshare in TMT, compared to PractiTest’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of PractiTest users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Performance Te...

Read 17 IBM Rational Performance Tester reviews

110 Views
84 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

PractiTest

Read 7 PractiTest reviews

255 Views
175 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Performance Te...

PractiTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

IBM Rational Performance Tester and PractiTest compete in the performance testing and test management category respectively. PractiTest has the upper hand due to its user-friendly design and test management capabilities, while IBM Rational Performance Tester stands out for its extensive load testing features.

Features: IBM Rational Performance Tester provides detailed performance testing, load balancing, and scalability analysis. PractiTest offers diverse test management functionalities, seamless integration with other tools, and comprehensive reporting features.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Performance Tester could enhance usability, improve reporting features, and refine documentation. PractiTest needs to advance test scripting options, augment integration capabilities, and provide more customization in test plans.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Rational Performance Tester involves a more complex deployment and has inconsistent customer service reviews. PractiTest is noted for its straightforward deployment process and responsive support team, making it easier for users to get started and receive assistance.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Performance Tester has a higher setup cost and its ROI is debated, especially for smaller teams or projects. PractiTest offers cost-effective options and generally provides better ROI, making it suitable for broader project requirements and various team sizes.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 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 Performance Te...

Ranking in Test Management Tools

24th

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

PractiTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

18th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (21st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Management Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Performance Tester is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PractiTest is 2.6%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Management Tools

Featured Reviews

it_user323943

Netcool Engineer with 10,001+ employees

We can edit captured transactions and organize them by those for which we require performance metrics, but it lacks a set of manuals or guides that would take out some guess work.

It is used to capture and generate HTTP tests. The capture process is very easy. After this, we edited the captured transactions to organize them into the sections or transactions we require performance metrics for (i.e. splash page, user authentication, main pageload, logout, etc.). This editing process is easy to perform with the interface provided in Rational Performance Tester Finally, Rational Performance Tester has an import/export feature that has been extremely useful. We have used it to export our complete test library and import it into another Rational Performance Tester server with no loss or issues. This allows for platform test migrations and backup.

Read full review

Dave Carter

Test Team Lead at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

Flexible and intuitive with easy reporting, and good support that is instantly available through chat

It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different bug tracking tools at the same time. This is not an issue if you only have one bug tracker but we can potentially use different tools for different projects. As an example, if you connect PractiTest to Jira for one project, that's the one you have to use for all projects. We had a requirement to connect with Jira for one project, and a different tool for another, project but it was unable to accommodate that unfortunately. I would therefore like to see it easier to integrate with bug tracking tools at project level which would give each project the opportunity to use a different bug tracker if required.

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

"It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."

"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."

"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."

Cons

"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."

"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."

"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is much cheaper than Micro Focus LoadRunner. We need perpetual licenses. Support is included in the first sale. After that, you need to renew support every year."

"Pricing is probably in the middle, it's not the cheapest but it's not the most expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

30%

Computer Software Company

20%

Government

13%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

19%

Healthcare Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 63% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 24% of the time

Tricentis NeoLoad vs IBM Rational Performance Tester

Compared 14% of the time

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Competitors

Tricentis qTest vs PractiTest

Compared 27% of the time

Microsoft Azure DevOps vs PractiTest

Compared 27% of the time

Jira vs PractiTest

Compared 26% of the time

TestRail vs PractiTest

Compared 19% of the time

More PractiTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester

March 2025

Download IBM Rational Performance Tester product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites

March 2025

Download PractiTest product report

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester

No data available

Overview

IBM Rational Performance Tester is a performance testing solution that validates the scalability of web and server applications. Rational Performance Tester identifies the presence and cause of system performance bottlenecks and reduces load testing complexity.

IBM

Manage your QA and Testing process, controlling your testing tasks while getting complete visibility into your results, and most importantly releasing your products in a professional way

Professional end to end QA management for your manual and automation testing.

Create your manual tests and organize them based on cycles, sprints, etc.
Seamlessly integrate your manual testing with your automation and CI processes.
Reuse tests and correlate results across different releases and products.
Release your products with confidence and control.

PractiTest

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon

Canonical, SAS, Amobee, Play Buzz, Abbott, Aternity, Zerto, Freeman

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest

March 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. PractiTest report.

See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Management 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.