IBM Rational Performance Tester vs Tricentis qTest comparison

IBM and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Management Tools category. IBM is ranked #24, while Tricentis is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 1.4% mindshare in TMT, compared to Tricentis’s 16.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Tricentis 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

Tricentis qTest

Read 17 Tricentis qTest reviews

1,427 Views
893 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Performance Te...

Tricentis qTest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis qTest are both prominent software testing solutions. IBM Rational Performance Tester seems to have the upper hand in performance testing capabilities, while Tricentis qTest is preferred for its test management features.

Features: IBM Rational Performance Tester offers robust performance testing, extensive automation tools, and comprehensive scalability. Tricentis qTest is known for its strong test management, real-time analytics, and seamless integrations with other tools.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Performance Tester could enhance user-friendliness, reduce the complexity of its setup process, and offer better documentation. Tricentis qTest needs improved reporting capabilities, streamlined usability, and enhanced customization options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Rational Performance Tester requires detailed configuration, which can be time-consuming. It receives favorable feedback for its customer support. Tricentis qTest is appreciated for its relatively straightforward deployment and responsive support services.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Performance Tester's setup costs are high but considered worthwhile for large-scale projects. Tricentis qTest offers competitive pricing and users report good return on investment for its management capabilities.

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

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

Tricentis qTest

Ranking in Test Management Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 Tricentis qTest is 16.1%, up from 10.7% 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

Sudipto Dey

Technical Lead at Linde

It doesn't require installation because you can use it through the URL; it's user-friendly and has an excellent reporting feature

The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better. There's a feature I want to document on the Tricentis Idea Portal for Tricentis qTest, which I hope to see in the next version of the tool. It's a feature available in Micro Focus where you execute a test, and then on a spec level, you mark it as pass or fail. Then at the overall level, Micro Focus will automatically mark the test as a pass if all steps passed or failed, even if one step failed. However, here in Tricentis qTest, you still need to mark the overall level of the test cases. It's not automated, unlike what you have in Micro Focus. If Tricentis adds that feature in Tricentis qTest, it will make life easier for testers.

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

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

"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."

"What I found most valuable in Tricentis qTest is that it doesn't require installation. You use it through the URL. It also has an excellent reporting feature."

"The test automation tracking is valuable because our automated testing systems are distributed and they did not necessarily have a single point where they would come together and be reported. Having all of them report back to qTest, and having one central place where all of my test executions are tracked and reported on, is incredibly valuable because it saves time."

"The integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good."

"The main thing that really stuck out when we started using this tool, is the linkability of qTest to JIRA, and the traceability of tying JIRA requirement and defects directly with qTest. So when you're executing test cases, if you go to fail it, it automatically links and opens up a JIRA window. You're able to actually write up a ticket and it automatically ties it to the test case itself."

"The solution's real-time integration with JIRA is seamless."

"I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests."

"Being able to log into Defects, go right into JIRA, add that defect to the user story, right there at that point, means we connect all of that. That is functionality we haven't had in the past. As a communication hub, it works really well. It's pretty much a closed loop; it's all contained right there. There's no delay. You're getting from the defect to the system to JIRA to the developer."

"I like the way it structures a project... We're able to put the test cases into qTest or modify something that's already there, so it's a reusable-type of environment. It is very important that we can do that and change our test data as needed..."

More Tricentis qTest pros

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."

"I would really love to find a way to get the results, into qTest Manager, of Jenkins' executing my Selenium scripts, so that when I look at everything I can look at the whole rather than the parts. Right now, I can only see what happens manually. Automation-wise, we track it in bulk, as opposed to the discrete test cases that are performed. So that connection point would be really interesting for me."

"I wouldn't say a lot of good things about Insights, but that's primarily because, with so many test cases, it is incredibly slow for us. We generally don't use it because of that."

"Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum."

"The installation of the software could be streamlined. We pay for the on-premise support and they help us a lot, but the installation is something which is very command-line oriented."

"The support for Tricentis qTest has room for improvement. The response could be better."

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users."

"You can add what I believe are called suites and modules. I opened a ticket on this as to what's the difference. And it seems there's very little difference. In some places, the documentation says there's no difference. You just use them to organize how you want. But they're not quite the same because there are some options you can do under one and not the other. That gets confusing. But since they are very close to the same, people use them differently and that creates a lack of consistency."

"Reporting shouldn't be so difficult. I shouldn't have to write so many queries to get the data I'm looking for, for a set of metrics about how many releases we had. I still have to break those spreadsheets out of there to get the data I need."

More Tricentis qTest cons

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."

"Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."

"Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray."

"For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."

"We're paying a little over $1,000 for a concurrent license."

"We're paying $19,000 a year right now for qTest, with 19 licenses. All the on-premise support is bundled into that."

"The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."

"It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."

"We signed for a year and I believe we paid $24,000 for Flood, Manager, and the qTest Insights. We paid an extra for $4,000 for the migration support."

More Tricentis qTest pricing and cost advice

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

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Tricentis qTest?

I found the reporting aspect to be the most valuable as it provided a comprehensive overview of the efforts needed and the workload for individual tests.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis qTest?

Based on whatever I heard, I can say that Tricentis qTest is a little costlier than other test management tools, like Jira, Zephyr, or Xray.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tricentis qTest?

Tricentis qTest needs improvement in its repositories' functionality. Unlike Azure, it does not have repositories to upload scripts. Additionally, it lacks features like task addition and tracking ...

See all answers

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 Tosca vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 33% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 27% of the time

TestRail vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 12% of the time

Zephyr Enterprise vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 8% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs Tricentis qTest

Compared 5% of the time

More Tricentis qTest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester

March 2025

Download IBM Rational Performance Tester product report

Buyer's Guide

Tricentis qTest

March 2025

Download Tricentis qTest product report

Also Known As

Rational Performance Tester

qTest

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

Tricentis is the global leader in enterprise continuous testing, widely credited for reinventing software testing for DevOps, cloud, and enterprise applications. The Tricentis AI-based, continuous testing platform provides a new and fundamentally different way to perform software testing. An approach that’s totally automated, fully codeless, and intelligently driven by AI. It addresses both agile development and complex enterprise apps, enabling enterprises to accelerate their digital transformation by dramatically increasing software release speed, reducing costs, and improving software quality.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon

McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

March 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Performance Tester vs. Tricentis qTest 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.