IBM Rational Test Workbench vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Performance Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #19, while OpenText is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.9. IBM holds a 0.5% mindshare in PTT, compared to OpenText’s 8.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Test Workbench

Read 4 IBM Rational Test Workbench reviews

126 Views
70 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Read 42 OpenText LoadRunner Cloud reviews

2,891 Views
1,695 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Test Workbench

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 5, 2025

IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud are both leaders in the realm of software testing, yet OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is perceived as having an edge due to its expansive feature set suitable for diverse environments, justifying its investment.

Features: IBM Rational Test Workbench provides robust test automation with strong integration capabilities, beneficial for continuous integration reliant teams. It supports extensive UI, API, and performance testing along with service virtualization. Meanwhile, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud distinguishes itself with elaborate and scalable performance testing via cloud-based solutions, impressive for its real-time analytics and ability to handle complex testing scenarios. Its cloud-native approach is highly appreciated for ease of execution and monitoring, tracking metrics, and using real-time anomaly detection.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Test Workbench can enhance its ease of deployment, specifically reducing difficulties associated with on-premise installations and expanding its cloud capabilities to match modern enterprises. The user interface could be further simplified for enhanced user experience. Despite its integration strengths, further advancements in cross-platform flexibility would be advantageous. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, while rich in features, could improve by enhancing user accessibility for non-technical users. Reports, although comprehensive, may benefit from more customization options. A focus on reducing the perceived initial cost can make it more attractive to budget-conscious users without sacrificing quality.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText LoadRunner Cloud offers seamless, cloud-based deployment, significantly simplifying start-up processes alongside its commendable customer support that facilitates smooth ongoing operation. In contrast, IBM Rational Test Workbench's on-premise deployment can initially be more labor-intensive, requiring in-depth internal IT involvement, although it maintains a competent customer service framework.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Test Workbench typically offers a lower setup cost, appealing to budget-focused companies while yielding substantial ROI through its integration strengths with other IBM products. On the other hand, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, despite its higher installation costs, often achieves a superior ROI, attributed to its scalable cloud solutions and extensive performance insights, which justify its premium price over time.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,862 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 (36th)

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Ranking in Performance Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is 8.4%, down from 9.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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

AlexLogan

Senior Manager, Performance Engineering at Enel Group

Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement

The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.

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."

"Both the professional and cloud versions of Micro Focus LoadRunner use the same scripting or programming to execute performance modeling operations. This feature allows users to use various programming languages such as Java, C, or C++, which can run within either of the two environments. This flexibility in the programming language is a strong point of the software."

"The solution can scale."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."

"The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center."

"It is feature-rich. It supports most protocols, which is important because I am in charge of a team at the bank, and we do performance testing for all kinds of different applications. We have tons of them. We even do video streams."

"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."

"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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."

"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."

"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."

"One area of improvement in the software's support is the replaying of captured data within the development environment. It would be beneficial if the replay feature could accurately mimic what the actual application is doing for better analysis and testing."

"Its scripting features need improvement."

"One area for improvement in LoadRunner Cloud, especially for agile models, is its limited support for functional testing alongside its robust non-functional testing capabilities."

"Improvements to the reporting would be good."

"There is a steep learning curve for the product, too."

"The initial setup is complex, but that is the nature of the technology."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"The solution is expensive."

"We make use of virtual user hours. We buy time in the LoadRunner Cloud. It costs around $80,000."

"The pricing is very reasonable and the licensing is straightforward."

"The pricing for OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is average."

"Pricing is dependent on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the cloud, it's likely competitive. However, if you're talking about the on-premise version, professional or enterprise licenses are required. Prices are on the high side. They are not cheap."

"It's a very expensive solution"

"There is no monthly or yearly cost but rather, the fees are based on the amount of traffic that you use."

"The solution’s price is considerably high."

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

33%

Computer Software Company

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?

I would prefer it to be cheaper. On a scale of one to ten, the price is a five. It's delivering functionality, but we also use JMeter ( /products/apache-jmeter-reviews ), which is free.

See all answers

Comparisons

ReadyAPI Test vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 100% of the time

More IBM Rational Test Workbench Competitors

Tricentis NeoLoad vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 26% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 24% of the time

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

Compared 21% of the time

BlazeMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 18% of the time

Apache JMeter vs OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText LoadRunner Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

March 2025

Download IBM Rational Test Workbench product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

March 2025

Download OpenText LoadRunner Cloud product report

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load

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

Do your performance and load testing in the cloud. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud makes it easy to plan, run, and scale performance tests without the need to deploy and manage infrastructure.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

April 2025

Free Report: IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud 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.