IBM Rational Performance Tester vs Tricentis qTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Logo
131 views|95 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Tricentis Logo
2,059 views|1,256 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis qTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: April 2024).
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured 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."

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pros →

"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.""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...""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 integration with Selenium and other tools is one of the valuable features. Importing of test cases is also good.""The most valuable feature is reusing test cases. We can put in a set of test cases for an application and, every time we deploy it, we are able to rerun those tests very easily. It saves us time and improves quality as well.""The JIRA integration is really important to us because it allows our business analysts to see test results inside the JIRA ticket and that we have met the definition of "done," and have made sure we tested to the requirements of the story.""qTest helps us compile issues and have one place to look for them. We're not chasing down emails and other sources. So in the grand scheme of things, it does help to resolve issues faster because everyone is working off of the same information in one location.""The most important feature which I like in qTest manager is the user-friendliness, especially the tabs. Since I'm the admin, I use the configuration field settings and allocate the use cases to the different QA people. It is not difficult, as a QA person, for me to understand what is happening behind the scenes."

More Tricentis qTest Pros →

Cons
"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.""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."

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Cons →

"Tricentis qTest's technical support team needs to improve its ability to respond to queries from users.""We feel the integration between JIRA and qTest could be done even better. It's not as user-friendly as qTest's other features. The JIRA integration with qTest needs to mature a lot... We need smarter execution with JIRA in the case of failures, so that the way we pull out the issues again for the next round is easy... Locating JIRA defects corresponding to a trait from the test results is something of a challenge.""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 user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved.""As an admin, I'm unable to delete users. I'm only able to make a user inactive. This is a scenario about which I've already made a suggestion to qTest. When people leave the company, I should be able to delete them from qTest. I shouldn't have to have so many 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.""Could use additional integration so that there is a testing automation continuum.""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."

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."
  • More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price I was quoted is just under $60,000 for 30 licenses, annually, and that's with a 26.5 percent discount."
  • "Our license price point is somewhere between $1,000 and $2,000 a year."
  • "It's quite a few times more costly than other tools on the market."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "For the 35 concurrent licenses, we pay something like $35,000 a year."
  • "For me, pricing for Tricentis qTest is moderate, so that's a five out of ten. It's more affordable than my company's previous solution, which was Micro Focus ALM."
  • More Tricentis qTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:The user interface has a somewhat outdated design, which is certainly an area that could be improved. Some of the modules appear to be loosely connected, but despite these aspects, our overall… more »
    Ranking
    24th
    Views
    131
    Comparisons
    95
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    6th
    Views
    2,059
    Comparisons
    1,256
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    761
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Performance Tester
    qTest
    Learn More
    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.

    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. 

    Sample Customers
    andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
    McKesson, Accenture, Nationwide Insurance, Allianz, Telstra, Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton (LVMH PCIS), and Vodafone
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Government29%
    Transportation Company14%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Construction Company14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Government12%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Insurance Company18%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise33%
    Large Enterprise44%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Management Tools
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: April 2024.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 24th in Test Management Tools while Tricentis qTest is ranked 6th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while Tricentis qTest is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis qTest writes "Puts all our test cases in one location where everyone can see them. qTest also allows the segregation of different types of Testing". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Tricentis qTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS.

    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.