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

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
Users praise IBM Rational Test Workbench's responsive, knowledgeable support, though some mention occasional delays; overall satisfaction is high.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

No sentiment score available
IBM Rational Test Workbench needs better integration, improved reporting, enhanced performance, increased stability, simplified setup, and more comprehensive documentation.
No sentiment score available
 

Scalability Issues

No sentiment score available
IBM Rational Test Workbench is efficient for large-scale testing, praised for automation, adaptability, and strong integration capabilities despite setup complexity.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
IBM Rational Test Workbench offers flexible, potentially costly pricing, appreciated for features but expensive compared to alternatives, with volume licensing available.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

No sentiment score available
Users praise IBM Rational Test Workbench for its reliability, robustness, and integration, but some report occasional glitches needing attention.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

No sentiment score available
IBM Rational Test Workbench is favored for its integration, automation, comprehensive test coverage, and performance in continuous integration and delivery processes.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (34th)
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is 6.1%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
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 Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.